QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN PRACTICE Understanding the Experiences of Digital G2P Payment Recipients: A Qualitative Research Toolkit © 2025 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank 1818 H Street NW Washington DC 20433 Telephone: 202-473-1000 Internet: www.worldbank.org This work is a product of the staff of The World Bank with external contributions. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply any judgment on the part of The World Bank concerning the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Rights and Permissions The material in this work is subject to copyright. Because the World Bank encourages dissemination of its knowledge, this work may be reproduced, in whole or in part, for noncommercial purposes as long as full attribution to this work is given. Any queries on rights and licenses, including subsidiary rights, should be addressed to World Bank Publications, The World Bank Group, 1818 H Street NW, Washington, DC 20433, USA; fax: 202-522-2625; e-mail: pubrights@worldbank.org. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IN PRACTICE Understanding the Experiences of Digital G2P Payment Recipients: A Qualitative Research Toolkit Table of contents About this toolkit 7 Introduction and context 10 The rationale for a recipient-centric approach to designing and 11 implementing G2P payments The benefits of a qualitative approach 12 Phase I. Research design and methodology 15 STEP 1. Formulating research questions 17 STEP 2. Choosing the sample 22 STEP 3. Defining the research method(s) 28 STEP 4. Developing data collection instruments 38 Ethical considerations 42 Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 45 STEP 5. Assembling the fieldwork team 47 STEP 6. Planning the fieldwork 51 STEP 7. Conducting the fieldwork 56 STEP 8. Recording and collecting observations 62 STEP 9. Conducting debriefing sessions 67 Ethical considerations 71 Phase III. Data management and analysis 73 STEP 10. Organizing and storing the data 75 STEP 11. Coding the data 81 STEP 12. Extracting insights 84 STEP 13. Elaborating user persona 86 STEP 14. Developing journey maps 91 Ethical considerations 96 Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 97 STEP 15. Compiling a structured and comprehensive report 99 STEP 16. Developing a dissemination plan 106 Ethical considerations 109 Annexes 110 Annex 1: Interview instrument 111 Annex 2: Key informant interview instrument 115 Annex 3: Focus group discussion instrument 118 Annex 4: Service safari instrument 120 Annex 5: Informed consent template for recipients 123 Annex 6: Informed consent template for key informant interviews 124 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 Tool 1: Research Questions 21 Tools Tool 2: Qualitative Samples Tool 3: Research Methods 27 36 Tool 4: Operationalization Matrix 40 Tool 5: Fieldwork Plan 54 Tool 6: Note-taking Forms 64 Tool 7: Research Wall 69 Tool 8: Coding Book 82 Tool 9: User Persona 88 Tool 10: Journey Map 94 Tool 11: Dissemination Plan 108 Box 1: Qualitative Research: Potential Insights for G2P Payments 14 Boxes Box 2: The Use of Visual Stimuli in Qualitative Research for G2P Payments 39 Box 3: Ethical Principles for the Participation of Children in Qualitative Research 44 Box 4: The Importance of Pilot Testing in Fieldwork Planning 52 Box 5: Professionalism and Cultural Sensitivity in Fieldwork 56 Box 6: Behavioral Techniques for Facilitators to Build Rapport 57 Box 7: Systematic Organization of Qualitative Data Collection 63 Box 8: Bringing a Gender Lens to Intercept Interviews 72 Box 9: Guidelines for Transcribing Audio Files 78 Box 10: Guidelines for Translating Local Language Transcripts 79 Box 11: Articulating or Formulating insights 85 Box 12: The Importance of a Reflective and Critical Approach to User Personas 90 Box 13: Key Concepts for Journey Mapping in G2P Payments 92 Table 1: Recommendations for defining research questions 18 Tables Table 2: Sampling methods in qualitative research 24 Table 3: Key personnel and their responsibilities 48 Table 4: Key training components for facilitators and notetakers 50 Table 5: Examples of identification codes for recording files 67 Table 6: Debrief objectives for field teams 68 Table 7: Coding to highlight gender differentials and marginalization 83 Table 8: Selecting insights criteria 100 Figure 1: Mapping qualitative research methods 29 Figures Figure 2: General process of organization and storage of data in qualitative analysis 76 Figure 3: Main macro moments of the G2P payment journey 93 Figure 4: Ways to present qualitative research findings 105 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This toolkit was compiled by Catalina Gutiérrez Ricci (G2Px Consultant), Jayshree Venkatesan (G2Px Consultant), and Minita Varghese (Digital Specialist). The authors gratefully acknowledge comments and inputs from Karol Karpinski, Julia Michal Clark, Yoonyoung Cho and Verónica López. The authors are also grateful to Lara Srivastava for her editorial assistance and Myriam Meyer Segura for design and layout assistance. The toolkit draws extensively on existing World Bank publications and previous work on conducting qualitative research. These publications are referenced throughout the note, and the reader is encouraged to consult them to get a deeper understanding of each topic. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 6 About this toolkit Understanding the Experiences of Digital G2P Payment Recipients: A Qualitative Research Toolkit aims to facilitate the study of recipient experiences of Government-to-Person payments (G2P), with a view to informing policies and programmatic interventions across various contexts. Insights about recipient access and use of G2P payments can inform government decisions about the underlying G2P architecture and its role in advancing long term development outcomes around financial inclusion, women’s economic empowerment, government efficiency and resilience. Several World Bank task teams and researchers from partner organizations conduct qualitative studies on the digitalization of G2P payments to garner such insights. The intention of such studies is to identify and address barriers to the access and use of digital G2P payments from a recipient’s perspective . Qualitative research plays a critical role in understanding G2P recipient motivations, life experiences, narratives and behaviors, and in identifying barriers and enablers for the successful implementation of digital G2P payments. This qualitative toolkit is designed to assist operational and research teams on the ground as they conduct recipient-centric qualitative research on G2P payments, primarily delivered through various government programs1. It provides methodological guidelines and step-by-step instructions, including examples, practical tools, templates and ethical recommendations. The toolkit is a general guide and not intended to be prescriptive. It can be adapted by each research team according to their specific needs and requirements. Given the rapidly changing nature of user experiences and advancements in digitalization, it will act as a living document; i.e., additional exercises, tools, training materials, and case studies will be added to future iterations as research on experiences of G2P payment recipients worldwide expands. The toolkit is structured around the four key phases of the qualitative research process as follows: 1. Throughout the toolkit, qualitative research is often contextualized within the confines of a program, but the guidance is applicable to “non- program” G2P payments such as wage payments, pensions, etc. as well. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT About this toolkit 7 Qualitative research process Phase I. Phase II. Research design Fieldwork and data and methodology collection 1. Formulating research questions 5. Assembling the fieldwork team STEPS & TOOLS Tool 1: Research Questions 6. Planning the fieldwork 2. Choosing the sample Tool 5: Fieldwork Plan Tool 2: Qualitative Samples 7. Conducting the fieldwork 3. Defining the research method(s) Tool 3: Research Methods 8. Recording and collecting observations Tool 6: Note-taking Forms 4. Developing data collection instruments Tool 4: Operationalization Matrix 9. Conducting debriefing sessions Tool 7: Research Wall UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT About this toolkit 8 Phase III. Phase IV. Data management Findings report and and analysis dissemination plan 10. Organizing and storing the data 15. Compiling a structured and comprehensive report 11. Coding the data Tool 8: Coding Book 16. Developing a dissemination plan Tool 11: Dissemination Plan 12. Extracting insights 13. Elaborating user persona Tool 9: User Persona 14. Developing journey maps Tool 10: Journey Map UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT About this toolkit 9 Introduction and context 10 The rationale for a recipient-centric approach to designing and implementing G2P payments G2P payments emerged as a critical tool for governments during the COVID-19 pandemic, with over 100 countries announcing plans to scale up social assistance payments in response to the crisis. However, the digital infrastructure required for G2P payments varies significantly across countries, posing challenges to the effective digital delivery of payments in large-scale programs. Given the urgent need to provide effective and targeted assistance, the digitalization of payments, payment interoperability and payment choice in the G2P landscape have become more critical than ever. The digitalization of G2P payments presents challenges both in terms of supply and demand. From a supply perspective, digital payments infrastructure may be largely inadequate or have limited coverage in remote and rural areas2. The need to cash out at the recipient end adds to the complexity of ensuring liquidity at the last mile, resulting in a poor user experience. Furthermore, various studies have reported payment delays, failed payments, and high transaction fees3 4. On the demand side, a lack of digital literacy and familiarity with digital interfaces hinders the adoption of digital G2P payments. In addition, the risk of fraud and diversion of funds is particularly high when users are not familiar with security features. The lack of required 2. Klapper & Singer, 2017. The Opportunities and Challenges of Digitizing Government-to-Person identity documents exacerbates this situation. Data breaches and inadequate mechanisms Payments,The World Bank Research Observer, Washington, D.C.: World Bank. https://ideas.repec. for addressing these problems can potentially undermine user trust and make matters worse5. org/a/oup/wbrobs/v32y2017i2p211-226..html 3. Klapper & Singer, 2017. The Opportunities and Moreover, in areas with limited digital infrastructure, challenges similar to those in non-digital Challenges of Digitizing Government-to-Person Payments, The World Bank Research Observer, environments may exist, together with new risks of fraud. Washington, D.C.: World Bank. https://ideas.repec. org/a/oup/wbrobs/v32y2017i2p211-226..html 4. World Bank, 2021. Covid-19 G2P Cash-Transfer Payments. Case Study: Philippines. Washington, While the emergence of digital systems and solutions to support G2P payments is an important D.C.: World Bank. https://documents1.worldbank. org/curated/en/368351625163110870/pdf/COVID- initial advancement6, it is crucial to recognize and tackle other challenges that recipients may 19-G2P-Cash-Transfer-Payments-Case-Study- Philippines.pdf encounter in accessing G2P payments. Poor recipient experiences are likely to discourage the 5. World Bank, 2021. Covid-19 G2P Cash-Transfer Payments. Case Study: Philippines. Washington, broader adoption of digital services7. These challenges raise critical policy questions, namely D.C.: World Bank. https://documents1.worldbank. org/curated/en/368351625163110870/pdf/COVID- around how the design and delivery of G2P payments can be improved to provide recipients 19-G2P-Cash-Transfer-Payments-Case-Study- Philippines.pdf with better access and a smoother user experience. 6. Baur-Yazbeck,2019. A New Generation of Government-to-Person Payments Is Emerging. CGAP. www.cgap.org/blog/new-generation- government-person-payments-emerging 7. Zimmerman & Baur-Yazbeck, 2016. Understanding Consumer Risks in Digital Social Payments. CGAP. www.cgap.org/research/ publication/understanding-consumer-risks- digital-social-payments UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Introduction and context 11 In this context, the present recipient-centric methodology analyzes user experiences throughout the G2P delivery process using various qualitative tools. Incorporating insights from this research into program design and delivery could boost government efficiency and provide immediate assistance to recipients in need. Ultimately, this approach can help foster resilience among the most vulnerable of recipients, contributing to their well-being and empowerment. Finally, this toolkit is based on a number of publications describing qualitative research techniques, and draws primarily from the CGAP’s customers guide8, World Bank toolkit on ID research9, and the FHI 360 data collector’s field guide10. The benefits of a qualitative approach Successful implementations of digital G2P payments require robust research processes. These should be tailored to the peculiarities of different country contexts, to assess the effectiveness of policy and to pinpoint areas for enhancement in program design and execution. Research studies can be based on a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed method approach, depending on the specific goals in question. While quantitative research informs decision-making based on objective, aggregated data that reflects frequencies, proportions, or general trends, qualitative research results in understanding the subjective perspectives of recipients. Qualitative research can be conducted independently, as a standalone methodology, or as a complement to quantitative methods. When used independently, qualitative studies often adopt an exploratory approach. This makes them particularly valuable as an initial step in addressing a research question or exploring a new topic. Qualitative methods are also frequently employed during a program’s evaluation phase, following a program pilot or implementation. In this context, qualitative research enhances quantitative findings, whether derived from administrative data or user surveys, by offering richer and more detailed insights into user experiences and needs. These insights are often more 8. The Consultative Group to Assist the Poor actionable than those provided by quantitative data alone. (CGAP) developed the The CGAP Customer- Centric Guide. https://customersguide.cgap.org 9. Bailur & Esquivel-Korsiak, 2019. Understanding People’s Experiences with Identification: Regardless of the approach, qualitative research maintains a high level of rigor and relevance11. A Guide for Qualitative End-User Research on ID. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. It excels in answering critical questions about “how, why, and under what circumstances” http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/795541561701481546 phenomena occur, making it indispensable for studying user experiences, particularly among 10. Mack, Woodsong, MacQueen, Guest & Namey, 2005. Qualitative Research Methods:A Data socially and demographically diverse populations12. In the case of G2P payments (which aim Collector’s Field Guide. Family Health International 360. www.fhi360.org/resources/qualitative- to empower recipients), this type of research provides a nuanced understanding of the needs research-methods-data-collectors-field-guide 11. Skovdal & Cornish, 2015. Qualitative Research and expectations of potential recipients. Findings from qualitative research can help boost for Development: A guide for practitioners. Practical Action Publishing, Rugby, UK. participation, increase accountability, and address complaints that may not be captured 12. Skovdal & Cornish, 2015. Qualitative Research for Development: A guide for practitioners. through other means. Qualitative approaches are also useful in understanding local contexts, Practical Action Publishing, Rugby, UK. which can help design realistic solutions for challenges such as gender gaps in accessing digital 13. Zimmerman, May, Kellison & Klugman, 2020. Digital Cash Transfers in Times of COVID-19 : Opportunities and Considerations for Women’s financial services. By way of example, in countries with gender disparities, women beneficiaries Inclusion and Empowerment. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank. may not always be aware of their entitlements, the timing of disbursements, their account org/curated/en/378931596643390083/ Digital-Cash-Transfers-in-Times-of-COVID-19- balances, and how to effectively utilize their accounts13. Opportunities-and-Considerations-for-Womens- Inclusion-and-Empowerment UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Introduction and context 12 The benefits of qualitative research for designing or improving G2P payments through a better understanding of the recipient experience, include the following (see also Box 1): a. EACH RECIPIENT’S EXPERIENCE IS UNIQUE AND SUBJECTIVE Qualitative research is indispensable for gaining insights into the barriers that recipients face at various stages (including information sourcing), for identifying individuals unable to access services and for understanding their usage patterns. b. QUALITATIVE RESEARCH IS OPEN-ENDED AND EXPLORATORY It enables the collection of nuanced information and the generation of new insights into recipient usage patterns and challenges. For example, a Women’s World Banking study in Indonesia revealed that recipients held varied and often incorrect perceptions regarding the consequences of leaving a balance in their accounts or withdrawing the entire benefit: some women believed that their accounts would be blocked if they withdrew the entire benefit, while others thought that any remaining funds would be reclaimed by the bank 14. c. BY CATERING TO THE SPECIFIC NEEDS OF DIFFERENT RECIPIENT CATEGORIES, QUALITATIVE RESEARCH CAN HELP IDENTIFY A WIDE VARIETY OF SOLUTIONS For instance, the needs and challenges faced by an elderly woman from a lower socio- economic background are markedly distinct from those encountered by a young male from a higher socio-economic stratum. Engaging in open-ended and guided conversations, as part of qualitative research, facilitates the identification of effective solutions that can cater to recipients’ unique circumstances. d. NARRATIVES POSSESS THE POTENTIAL TO EVOKE STRONG EMOTIONS AND ARE PARTICULARLY IMPACTFUL FOR VULNERABLE GROUPS G2P payments often target the most marginalized demographics of the population, such as women (who, for instance, may be hesitant to disclose the funds they receive to their families). These recipients’ unique experiences and perspectives are difficult to capture through traditional quantitative surveys or large group discussions. Engaging with these recipients requires a safe, secure, and trusting environment, e.g., such as one-on-one interview sessions with researchers. 14. Theis, Rusconi, Panggabean & Kelly, 2020. Delivering on the Potential of Digitized G2P: Driving Women’s Financial Inclusion and Empowerment through Indonesia’s Program Keluarga Harapan. www.womensworldbanking. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/August2020_ G2P_Report.pdf UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Introduction and context 13 Box 1: Qualitative Research: Potential Insights for G2P Payments For G2P payment design and delivery, qualitative research can provide valuable insights in the following key areas: » Recipients’ perceptions and levels of satisfaction » Recipients’ knowledge of G2P payments » Recipients’ experiences with the program or the financial sector more broadly » Recipients’ engagement with the program at different stages (through a tool known as a journey map) » Social processes and contextual factors that influence the use of services, including social norms, values, behaviors, and cultural practices that may marginalize certain groups or have long-term impacts » Recipients’ perceptions of the program’s impact » Local contextual factors that could affect program delivery » Local responses and agencies that can help reduce poverty or limit the marginalization of vulnerable population segments UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Introduction and context 14 Phase I. Research design and methodology This section is intended to provide a guide for Phase I and the development of a thorough and robust qualitative research plan. 15 During this first phase, the Phase I research team should define the STEPS & TOOLS critical attributes of the research 1. Formulating the research that will be conducted in the questions subsequent stages. It is crucial to Tool 1: Research Questions follow the steps outlined herein 2. Choosing the sample to ensure a comprehensive and Tool 2: Qualitative Samples robust investigation that will produce pertinent, detailed, and 3. Defining the research method(s) valuable insights for actionable Tool 3: Research Methods decision-making. 4. Developing data collection instruments Tool 4: Operationalization Matrix PHASE OUTCOME This part of the qualitative research process focuses on defining the research questions, selecting the participant sample, choosing the research methods, and developing the data collection instruments (including visual prompts if necessary). 16 STEP 1. Formulating research questions The benefits and challenges associated with G2P payment digitalization have been extensively studied15. However, access to research that delves into recipient experiences still needs to be improved, even within a single country. The success of G2P payments depend not only on infrastructure development and enabling regulatory frameworks but also on the experiences and motivations of recipients, particularly the barriers and challenges they face. Understanding the recipients’ experiences with the overall payment delivery process, and at critical junctures, can help identify key opportunities to scale digital G2P payments, guide the design of new policy interventions, and optimize current implementations. Understanding the daily life of recipients and their experiences with G2P payments, through qualitative research, can inform better program design, boost trust and increase usage of digital payments. The first step in designing qualitative research is to determine which approach to use for the study, exploratory or evaluative, based on the penetration of digital payments in the country or region under consideration. The primary objective of an exploratory approach is to gain new insights and identify motivational or behavioral barriers that likely hinder the future adoption or use of digital payments. This approach is recommended when digital G2P payments are not sufficiently widespread (or not yet in place) and when the level of digitalization in a particular population is relatively low. In such environments, it is important to identify any resistance or barriers associated with digital communications, particularly if payments were previously delivered using non-digital means. Questions that are open-ended and broad are favored given that the phenomenon under study would be relatively unfamiliar to the research team. Similarly, participants will likely not be accustomed to these types of mechanisms and far-reaching research questions will be needed to fully capture the context of implementing digitized payments. 15. Klapper & Singer, 2017. The Opportunities and Challenges of Digitizing Government-to-Person Payments, The World Bank Research Observer, Washington, D.C.: World Bank. https://ideas.repec. org/a/oup/wbrobs/v32y2017i2p211-226..html UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 17 An evaluative approach aims to understand user experience outcomes after the implementation of digital G2P payments, whether on a large scale or as a pilot program. The main objective is to determine whether the design and operational decisions that guided payment delivery were adequate in terms of creating a satisfactory user experience among the population or specific demographic groups. This helps identify those improvements or changes to the user experience needed to achieve long term development outcomes of interest. The two approaches are supplementary and can be used at various stages of the same study, across the research, design, and implementation phases. Table 1 describes key issues to consider 16. Note that this is an indicative and not when defining research questions (for both exploratory and evaluative approaches), in order to exhaustive list of questions for qualitative research. It is strongly recommended to adapt best inform policy interventions for G2P payment digitalization. and complement these questions, considering the specific contexts. TABLE 1: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DEFINING RESEARCH QUESTIONS 16. EXPLORATORY APPROACH EVALUATIVE APPROACH Research questions for designing and implementing a Research questions to improve the implementation of new service or expanding a recent service current or past services Current behaviors Overall experience and associated behaviors » What behaviors do recipients exhibit around digital » How do recipients assess their experience of receiving payment instruments? digital G2P payments? » How do current or potential recipients interact with » What are the highest and lowest rated components digital tools? of the user experience when receiving digital G2P » What are the most common behaviors exhibited by payments? recipients of digital G2P payments? » What are the core attitudes and beliefs concerning digital » What are the primary advantages and disadvantages payment methods and the program more generally (e.g., of non-digital government payments as perceived by need to cash out, low trust, high cost)? How does this recipients? influence recipient utilization of G2P payments? » What distinctions can be observed among various population segments when assessing user experience? Trust, knowledge, and influence Trust, knowledge, and influence » What is the level of trust of the organizations or » What is the level of trust of the organizations or government agencies that would be (or are) in charge of government agencies in charge of delivering digital G2P delivering digital G2P payments? payments? » What are the existing digital capabilities and skills of the » What capabilities and skills must users master to make general population (or specific segments)? effective use of digital G2P payment methods? » How would potential recipients obtain information about » What was the user experience like in acquiring these a new digital G2P payment delivery mechanism? capabilities? » What agencies or individuals could exert a favorable or » What capabilities and skills are still being developed by unfavorable influence on user awareness and adoption of users? digital G2P payments? » How were G2P recipients (or specific recipient segments) » What agencies or individuals could promote and boost able to access information about these programs? digital capabilities for the appropriate use and adoption » How did recipients obtain information regarding of digital G2P payments? procedures, requirements, and the redressal/resolution process when issues arose? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 18 EXPLORATORY APPROACH EVALUATIVE APPROACH Trust, knowledge, and influence » What agencies or individuals favorably or unfavorably influenced the awareness and adoption of digital G2P payments? » What agencies or individuals provided training and boosted capabilities to help users access digital channels? Motivations and barriers Motivations, barriers, and strategies » What are recipients’ primary motivations for using digital » What were the initial drivers for adopting digital G2P G2P payment methods? payment methods, and how have they changed over » What are the population’s key barriers to effectively using time? digital G2P payments? How do these obstacles correlate » What significant challenges did recipients encounter in with their capacities, beliefs, or conduct? using digital G2P payment methods, and how have these » By what means could user motivation and incentives be challenges evolved over time? strengthened and obstacles to adoption be diminished? » What tactics did recipients employ to surmount the obstacles encountered while using G2P programs? Touchpoints and interactions » What offline and online touch points were used by recipients to access and use digital G2P payments (for example, digital applications, in-person government offices, call centers, partner merchants, etc.)? » How do recipients rate their satisfaction when interacting with each of these touchpoints? » How did each touchpoint contribute to the overall user experience? » Are there any variations between population segments with respect to user experience across the different touchpoints? » To what extent were individuals apprised of the available avenues for seeking recourse and resolution in the event of an adverse experience? What has been their evaluation of the efficacy of these channels? Possible discrimination or bias Discrimination or bias » What features of the G2P payment design (segmentation, » To what extent has the design and implementation of access to distribution channels, access to means of the program mitigated arbitrary discrimination or bias as payment, etc.) consider particularities that excluded or perceived by the recipients? marginalized populations may present? » What aspects of the user experience in adopting » How do the program’s assumptions align with the digital payments are unique to vulnerable or excluded capacities, behaviors, or beliefs of vulnerable or populations? marginalized groups? » To what extent does the program design consider and mitigate potential exclusions or discrimination it may cause or exacerbate? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 19 EXPLORATORY APPROACH EVALUATIVE APPROACH Possible discrimination or bias » What obstacles or challenges exist for the effective use and adoption of the program among vulnerable and marginalized groups, including women, LGBTQIA+ communities, children, ethnic and religious minorities, refugees, migrants, displaced persons, and nomadic populations? Subjective effects on recipients’ well-being » What has been the overall impact of digital G2P payments on well-being, as perceived by recipients? How did these effects emerge according to their personal narrative? » What are the perceived pros and cons of the program in terms of personal well-being compared to non-digital payment methods or previous programs? » What improvements do recipients observe in their overall quality of life from receiving G2P payments digitally? This could include increased privacy, control, financial autonomy, reduced transaction costs, and so on. Tool 1 provides a step-by-step guide to formulating the research questions and can be adapted as necessary. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 20 Tool 1: Research Questions The following is a step-by-step guide for formulating research make adjustments as needed. To minimize bias, research questions during the research design phase: questions should be broad, open-ended, and formulated in a way that avoids alternative responses. 1. Determine whether the research will serve an initial 4. Make necessary adjustments to the phrasing of the exploratory purpose or whether it will assess a pilot questions to ensure that they are relevant to the specific project or G2P payments that have already been context and/or the particular types of G2P payment implemented. Use the guidance provided in Step 1 program recipients that are being considered. (Formulating Research Questions) as a reference and indicate your choice in a table as illustrated below. 5. Ensure that the questions are limited in number (between two and four depending on resources and team 2. Once you have established the type of qualitative capabilities) and that their phrasing is clear but succinct. research, select the analytical dimensions to be addressed and specify them in the second column of 6. Validate the research questions, once formulated, with the table. For instance, indicate whether it is important relevant stakeholders. The questions must be pertinent to understand current behaviors, trust, knowledge, and to any subsequent decision-making. Any necessary influence or if the focus is rather on exploring potential re-phrasing should be done well in advance, as it is not discrimination or bias. Additionally, you may define other feasible to make adjustments to questions during the dimensions tailored to the specific context. research process. 3. Formulate the research questions associated with each dimension and document this in the third column of the table. You may refer to the examples provided and TYPE OF RESEARCH DIMENSIONS RESEARCH QUESTIONS What are the core attitudes and beliefs concerning the digital G2P payment method in question (e.g., Overall experience and associated need to cash out, low trust, high cost)? How does behaviors this influence the recipient’s utilization of G2P Exploratory payment? x Evaluatory Other:__________ What has been the impact of digital payments on Subjective effects on recipients’ the well-being of female recipients? How are these well-being effects demonstrated according to their personal narrative? ______________________________ _________________________________________________ ______________________________ _________________________________________________ ______________________________ _________________________________________________ UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 21 STEP 2. Choosing the sample Given that qualitative research aims to comprehensively understand the perceptions of recipients, the size and composition of the sample selected should capture a wide range of perspectives. It is essential to prioritize participants who can offer valuable insights into the experiences of digital payment recipients. Characteristics like socio-economic background, digital literacy, and frequency of usage are key parameters for understanding the impact of digital G2P payments. Unlike quantitative research, qualitative sample selection is not conducted randomly and does need to adhere to criteria to ensure the representativeness of the general population. The sample size in qualitative studies is determined based on the requirements set by the research team, and on the specific characteristics and diversity of the recipients under study, with theoretical saturation playing a crucial role. Theoretical saturation occurs when the narratives of 17. The theoretical saturation of the information obtained during the research will be validated by participants start to become repetitive, and additional participant narratives do not significantly the research team in Phase III, which pertains to the analysis of the collected data. contribute any new data17. When selecting a sample for G2P payments, the research team must clearly define the target population. During the design phase of qualitative research, it is essential to rely on official and up-to-date administrative data to identify the demographic characteristics of recipients at both national and local levels. Financial or digitalization behavior should also be considered. If surveys on these topics have already been conducted, their results are highly relevant for guiding the selection of the qualitative sample and digging deeper into specific observed patterns. It is also advisable to consider relevant studies conducted in similar contexts, which can provide insights into expected financial behaviors or perceptions regarding G2P payments within the population. For qualitative research aimed at evaluating a pilot or existing G2P payment implementation, data on the usage and satisfaction of recipients must be included. In this way, specific qualitative samples can be created targeting recipients who have faced significant challenges in adopting or using G2P payments. To select participants for the study, the research team should start with understanding G2P payment policy at the national level. The next step would be to understand the intended target audience. When relevant quantitative data is available, its analysis can help pinpoint key criteria for participant selection. Qualitative research can then serve as a complement to quantitative analysis through an exploration of subjective user experiences. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 22 The following considerations and guiding principles could assist research teams as they define their target populations and choose their sample: a. Who is the intended target population for the G2P payments? According to the available data, what are their main demographic characteristics? Incorporating a wide range of participants with diverse characteristics will generate more meaningful insights into a diverse set of experiences. It is important to note that this diversity should not be pursued for the sake of representativeness but rather to enhance the qualitative interpretation. b. Are there any particular demographic groups for which a better understanding of the user experience for G2P payments is required? Some groups, such as women and minorities, and other more vulnerable groups, may be particularly relevant for achieving research objectives. c. Are there specific regions where additional data collection or comparisons are necessary? For instance, individuals residing in rural areas or areas with weak digital infrastructure or connectivity could be considered. d. Is it feasible to identify behavioral trends from the G2P payment usage data, such as higher rates of bank account ownership or greater usage of digital payments? Asking this question will enable the research team to categorize the primary conditions that facilitate or hinder usage of G2P payments. e. If G2P payments have already been implemented, is it feasible to identify individuals who encountered challenges with digital methods or expressed dissatisfaction with the experience through any other interaction channel? For example, some recipients of digital payments may have filed a claim or complaint with a public or private agency responsible for delivering the payments. f. Is it necessary to address issues of intersectionality when defining the sample?18 What intersections of variables generate the most interesting research clusters?19 For example, when considering female recipients of G2P payments, the user experience is likely to be different in the case of geographically isolated or previously excluded communities. The research team could consider these intersections to understand the implications for G2P payment policy. After addressing the guiding criteria and considering additional criteria based on the research questions outlined in Step 1, the method for sample selection can be identified, as well as the optimal sample size for each category. Table 2 describes three sampling methods for qualitative research, namely snowball sampling (or chain referral sampling), purposive sampling and quota sampling. 18. Intersectionality investigates how intersecting power relations influence social relations across diverse societies as well as individual experiences in everyday life. Intersectionality is a way of understanding and explaining complexity in the world, in people and in human experiences. 19. Holmes & Hunt, 2021. Have social protection responses to Covid-19 undermined or supported gender equality? Emerging lessons from a gender perspective. Working paper. London: ODI. www.odi.org/en/publications/have-social- protection-responses-to-covid-19-undermined- or-supported-gender-equality-emerging-lessons- from-a-gender-perspective UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 23 TABLE 2: SAMPLING METHODS IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. SAMPLING METHOD CHARACTERISTICS Recommended when the data is not available, or when In this approach, an initial recipient of digital G2P payments it is not sufficiently is chosen to act as a liaison with other users, inviting them to up-to-date or participate in the study. Newly recruited participants can then specific. SNOWBALL further extend the sample size by introducing additional individuals. SAMPLING (ALSO CALLED With this method, however, it is difficult to guarantee strict CHAIN REFERRAL adherence to the predefined sampling criteria for all participants. SAMPLING) As the research progresses, certain categories in the sampling framework may be filled, while others may remain incomplete. This method defines the segments of highest relevance according to the criteria specified in the research question, considering potential overlaps and intersections. PURPOSIVE SAMPLING For instance, a sample may include female recipients from rural areas who are over 40 years old. This type of sampling is an extension of purposive sampling. It considers the proportion of each population segment as a criterion for determining the sample size. QUOTA For instance, if gender is a crucial variable in selecting informal Recommended SAMPLING when quantitative workers living below the poverty line in Ecuador, the sample would administrative strive for equal representation, assuming a 1:1 gender ratio in the data is available, general population. up-to-date, and sufficiently specific. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 24 WHEN AND HOW IS IT USED? HOW DO WE DETERMINE THE SAMPLE SIZE? The snowball sampling method is used when there is a lack The sample size cannot be predetermined, as participants of access to administrative data necessary for characterizing are recruited progressively through the snowball sampling SNOWBALL SAMPLING the target population. It may be entirely unavailable or it may process. However, as a general rule, the sample size will require engagement with specific segments of the population depend on when the point of theoretical saturation is not reachable through other methods. reached. This method should be used only if the research team is able The sample size is evenly distributed across all categories. to answer the predefined guideline questions and can clearly identify the characteristics of the individuals who should be The total number of cases to be considered will depend on PURPOSIVE SAMPLING included in the sample. when theoretical saturation is achieved. This method is recommended when up-to-date Although no fixed number of cases is required to reach administrative data is available for understanding the target saturation, standards suggest between 30 and 60 individuals, population’s characteristics. depending on research objectives, the number of sampling criteria, the availability of participants, and the capabilities and resources of the research team. This method is used when the research team has access The total sample size is allocated among the categories to sufficient and up-to-date information to address the outlined in the selection criteria table, considering the questions outlined above and accurately quantify each approximate proportion of each segment in the actual segment, allowing for cross-tab analysis between them. population. This allocation is relative and does not necessitate an exact match with the population, especially QUOTA SAMPLING This method is also recommended when it is considered since the categories generated may not cover all recipient desirable to delve deeper into the experiences of segments subsegments comprehensively. that represent a more significant proportion of the population rather than focusing on cases that could be considered Similar to the purposive sampling method, the total sample exceptional or extreme. size can vary between 30 and 60 cases, depending on the above-mentioned considerations. This approach is advisable only if the administrative data of the G2P payment is reliable, whether it is still in the design phase or has already been implemented. Source: Adapted from Qualitative Research Methods, A data collector’s field guide20. 20. Mack, Woodsong, MacQueen, Guest & Namey, 2005. Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide. Family Health International. www.fhi360.org/sites/default/ files/media/documents/Qualitative%20 Research%20Methods%20-%20A%20Data%20 Collector%27s%20Field%20Guide.pdf UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 25 It is important to emphasize that the process of choosing the sample is an iterative one. The research team may have to review and improve the sample selection criteria and size based on whether the collected data adequately addresses the research questions and if theoretical saturation has been reached. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 26 Tool 2: Qualitative Samples Below is a step-by-step guide to help research teams choose access to any bank account, for example, should relate their samples and maintain rigor in the sample definition specifically to the digital payment experience. process: 5. Write the selected variables in the sampling table, 1. Gather all available administrative data related to creating the appropriate categories for each (see example recipients of G2P payments at the general level. This below). may require merging multiple datasets. If necessary, 6. Choose the sampling method (snowball, purposive, consolidate the datasets to create the most current and or quota sampling) based on the availability of comprehensive database possible. administrative data and the characteristics of the 2. Perform a descriptive analysis of the data. If possible, population. create frequency distributions for the main variables. 7. If using purposive or quota sampling, specify the 3. Analyze the relevant characteristics of the population. sample size for each category, non-proportionally or Although socio-demographic factors are important, focus proportionally, based on the population distribution. on variables associated with the experiences of recipients 8. If using snowball sampling, aim to include at least one as these can offer more valuable insights. case from each category to guide the recruitment 4. Identify 2 or 3 of the most relevant population variables process. that address the research questions formulated in Step 1. At least one of these characteristics, such as prior SAMPLING METHODS Snowball Purposive X Quota KEY VARIABLES 2 or 3 of the most relevant. VARIABLE 1 (Prior access to any bank account) category a (Yes) category b (No) category N VARIABLE 1: Prior access to any bank account. 3 3 category a: Yes category b: No category a VARIABLE 2: _____________ (If using purposive (If using purposive or quota sampling) or quota sampling) _________________________ category a:_________________ category b:_________________ category c:_________________ VARIABLE 2 category b VARIABLE 3: _____________ _________________________ category a:_________________ category b:_________________ category c:_________________ category c UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 27 STEP 3. Defining the research method(s) A wide variety of qualitative research methods can be used, alone or in combination, to understand the expectations and/or experiences of digital G2P payment recipients. The choice of the research method depends on the objectives of the study, the project’s access to the target population, the research team’s capabilities and resources, and the conditions under which the study is conducted. Deciding which specific method or methods to use is critical, as each one has specific characteristics that may or may not align with the research objectives. The approach chosen should support the aims of the research as not all methods suit every context. The use of multiple qualitative methods to capture individual behaviors and shared perspectives can provide a more comprehensive understanding of user experiences and enrich research findings. Figure 1 illustrates how different research methods can be used depending on the desired research approach, e.g. exploratory or evaluative, structured or unstructured. The most common methods for exploring user expectations, motivations, barriers, and experiences with G2P payments are intercept interviews, in-depth interviews, focus groups, and field observations. In addition, methods such as service safaris and key informant interviews can provide additional context and data points. The choice between observational methods (capturing recipients’ natural behavior) and conversational approaches (engaging in discussions with recipients) must always be made based on overall research goals. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 28 FIGURE 1: MAPPING QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHODS. OBSERVATIONAL Direct observations Service safaris STRUCTURED Intercept UNSTRUCTURED interviews Focus group discussions Key informant In-depth CONVERSATIONAL interviews interviews The section below describes in more detail the primary methods for conducting qualitative research (as identified in Figure 1), and Tool 3 provides a step-by-step guide on how to choose research methods for a qualitative study. The operational characteristics required for implementing each research method is explained in greater detail in Phase III. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 29 Intercept interviews DESCRIPTION Intercept interviews are brief and quick interviews (conducted in a public setting) with individuals receiving G2P payments at various touchpoints, such as registration or payment collection. The aim is to capture their feedback before or after a particular interaction. To avoid causing discomfort to the interviewees, the questions should be nonintrusive and kept fairly general. WHEN SHOULD IT This method is beneficial when it is necessary to understand recipients’ experiences BE USED? concerning a specific touchpoint, especially in face-to-face interactions. Its use is recommended during the exploratory phase and when evaluating the experience of recipients after they receive digital payments. ADVANTAGES Intercept interviews provide fresh and spontaneous information regarding recent experiences at the point of contact. Additionally, due to the brief nature of these interviews, many can be conducted at a single contact point and within a short period. DISADVANTAGES The public nature of questioning may result in guarded responses, especially if these are conducted in the vicinity of someone in power. The researcher must watch out for the participant’s discomfort and adjust accordingly. This could mean moving further away from a particular area or moving on to interviewing another respondent. Given the context in which this method is intended to be used, interviews in remote settings are not feasible. WHO CAN Respondents in an interview could be G2P recipients, bank or mobile money agents, PARTICIPATE? program staff, and other actors involved in the G2P payment delivery process. Depending on the research question, respondents can even include passers-by. For instance, if the intent is to check for awareness of a particular point of delivery, it might help to interview passers-by and ask them whether they have heard of the program delivering G2P payments. EXAMPLES OF » Why are you here today? QUESTIONS » How did you travel to this location today? THAT COULD BE » How long have you been waiting? CONSIDERED » How often do you come here? » What did you think about your last experience? » Were there any points during your interaction where you felt uncertain about what to do next? » What challenges did you face when completing your previous transaction? » What worked for you? What didn’t work? Why? HOW LONG No more than 10-15 minutes per person. SHOULD IT LAST? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 30 In-depth interviews 21 DESCRIPTION An in-depth interview refers to an individual conversation conducted by a researcher with a G2P payment recipient according to a semi-structured guide. The interview should be conducted in a private and comfortable space to ensure confidentiality. WHEN SHOULD IT It is advisable to consider in-depth interviews when the research objective involves BE USED? highly sensitive or emotional perspectives that are difficult to explore in a group setting or when there is a need to delve into individual experiences. For example, this approach is particularly useful for exploring motivational barriers and the perceived impact of G2P payments. ADVANTAGES This method can provide an in-depth understanding of the motivations, barriers, and emotions of recipients with respect to G2P payments. It is appropriate for sensitive topics or vulnerable populations, such as a low-income women contending with a patriarchal society. Since in-depth interviews are typically conducted using a semi-structured guide, it is possible to uncover emerging perspectives during the conversation that can enrich the research. In addition, these types of interviews can take place in remote settings. DISADVANTAGES This method requires a significant time commitment from the research team. It also needs a private and comfortable setting, which can slow down the data collection process. Information and experiences garnered by an in-depth interview may also be less generalizable than data gained from focus group discussions. WHO CAN In-depth interviews should normally be conducted directly with recipients of G2P PARTICIPATE? payments. EXAMPLES OF » What has been the most challenging aspect of your experience with digital G2P QUESTIONS payments? THAT COULD BE » How did you overcome the difficulties you encountered? CONSIDERED » How do you believe the G2P payment has impacted your daily life? » What aspects of the G2P payment delivery process would you change, and why? HOW LONG Between 20–45 minutes, with a maximum of one hour to avoid interviewee and SHOULD IT LAST? interviewer fatigue. 21. Bailur & Esquivel-Korsiak, 2019. Understanding People’s Experiences with Identification: A Guide for Qualitative End-User Research on ID. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/795541561701481546 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 31 Focus group discussions DESCRIPTION This research method gathers different individuals in a group conversation, guided by one or two moderators following a specific question guide. Its objective is to explore the common perspectives among G2P payment recipients who share specific characteristics that make them similar. This approach simplifies the identification of general findings, but is not suitable for a deeper examination of individual experiences. These discussions are most effective when conducted with groups of 4 to 8 participants. Groups should be homogenous across one or more key criteria, ensuring an ethical and meaningful discussion. WHEN SHOULD IT Focus groups are useful when the objective is to address general perspectives and understand BE USED? how social dynamics influence the perception and experience of using G2P payments. ADVANTAGES The group dynamic offers an opportunity to stimulate interaction between participants that individual interviews do not allow. Such discussions can reveal concerns or facts about the topics that may not be in the discussion guide but may still be relevant. This method is relatively low-cost compared to other individual qualitative methods and is useful for eliciting broad perceptions and experiences. Focus group discussions can also be held over digital platforms. DISADVANTAGES Focus groups can lead to “group think”, where participants agree with each other despite underlying differences in opinion. Additionally, the potential for social desirability bias—where participants adjust their responses to appear more socially acceptable—is typically higher than in individual interviews. This phenomenon is also called the Hawthorne Effect, where individuals modify their behavior or responses because they are aware others are observing them. This method is unsuitable for addressing highly personal or sensitive topics that participants may be reluctant to discuss in a group setting. WHO CAN Participants may include recipients of G2P payments as well as individuals responsible for PARTICIPATE? delivering the programs, provided that the groups are structured to ensure homogeneity across one or more key criteria. This homogeneity creates an enabling environment essential for ensuring a balanced discussion, for instance, separated by gender, age, type of vulnerable group, etc. EXAMPLES OF » What is your overall opinion of, and experience with, the G2P payment delivery process? QUESTIONS » How do you anticipate the process of adopting G2P digital payments would unfold for you? THAT COULD BE » What difficulties have you encountered with digital G2P payments, and how did you address CONSIDERED them? » Who among you has had a different experience from those already mentioned? HOW LONG Maximum 60 minutes to prevent participant fatigue. SHOULD IT LAST? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 32 Service safaris DESCRIPTION Not unlike the mystery shopper technique, the service safari is an observational technique intended to glean a first-person experience of being an actual recipient of G2P payments. To achieve this, the researcher must succeed in mimicking the eventual behavior of a recipient in interactions with service providers. They must attempt to resolve a specific situation through the relevant service channels. This approach aims to identify both exemplary aspects and critical (or painful) aspects of the payment delivery process. After experiencing the service, the researcher must recall and document their thoughts, actions, and reactions to the providers at various touchpoints. WHEN SHOULD IT The service safari technique is recommended when research questions relate to the delivery and BE USED? the relationship between the recipient’s experience/satisfaction with the payment service provider or program staff and the performance of various touchpoints (face-to-face, digital, or telephone). This is especially useful when the research team wishes to create user journey maps22. ADVANTAGES The service safari provides valuable insights into recipient experiences, allowing researchers to identify the actions, emotions, and challenges individuals face at various touchpoints. This method can highlight discrepancies between the intended design and actual delivery of G2P payments. Furthermore, it can uncover subtle breakdowns in the user experience that participants may overlook or not mention in interviews. DISADVANTAGES There is the risk that the researcher is discovered and this could prompt changes in the typical behavior of service providers. Such alterations would undermine the reliability of the data collected through this method. Consequently, it may prove challenging for the same researcher to conduct a service safari at the same touchpoint on multiple occasions. WHO CAN To conduct in-person service safaris, researchers must adopt a discreet appearance and simulate PARTICIPATE? common behaviors that enable them to pose convincingly as recipients of G2P payments. When applying this method at digital or telephone touchpoints, researchers should make sure their discourse aligns with the specific scenario they represent. EXAMPLES OF To apply this method, researchers should adhere to a guideline developed for specific situations, QUESTIONS such as registering for G2P payments, modifying account information, making a complaint, or THAT COULD BE requesting a new payment feature. Possible questions include: CONSIDERED » How can I apply for the G2P payment? What are the steps I should follow? » I did not receive the G2P payment last month. How can I resolve the situation? How can I file a complaint? » My account information has changed. What should I do? HOW LONG Maximum 60 minutes (allowing the researcher to recall the necessary details for subsequent SHOULD IT LAST? documentation), but this can vary depending on the specific situation and the research objectives. 22. The journey map is a widely used analytical technique in qualitative research for reconstructing the user experience, capturing the various moments and associated emotions. This technique will be explored in greater detail later in the toolkit, specifically in Step 14 (Developing journey maps). UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 33 Key informant interviews 23 DESCRIPTION Key informant interviews engage experts who can offer valuable insights into G2P payments and their relevant ecosystems, focusing on aspects such as operations or policy. Key informants are individuals whose professional or community roles establish them as authorities on specific G2P payment elements. WHEN SHOULD IT This method is particularly useful when the research questions aim to gain a BE USED? comprehensive understanding of the context in which G2P payments are delivered, as well as the structural facilitators or limitations that may influence their design or delivery. It should be seen as a complementary approach to methods that directly solicit recipient views and experiences. ADVANTAGES This type of interview leverages the unique experience and knowledge of key informants to gain a process and outcome-oriented perspective. It is especially valuable for gathering opinions from individuals who oversee implementation, represent communities of interest, or regularly interact with programs making G2P payments and design processes or policies related to its delivery. DISADVANTAGES Given that key informant interviews typically reflect an “expert” perspective, it is essential to corroborate the findings with results obtained through methods that directly address recipient experiences. In addition, this method is not cost-effective and can be time-consuming, as additional coordination is required to secure time with senior officials and other experts. WHO CAN Key informants include program staff, payment service providers, government PARTICIPATE? officials, community leaders, members of civil society, agents and employees of other service providers involved in the G2P ecosystem. EXAMPLES OF Questions will depend on who is being interviewed and for what purpose. For QUESTIONS instance, the questions below could be asked of staff or local community officials THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED involved in payment delivery: » How do you become an agent? How was the onboarding and with whom did you interact during this process? Did you have to sign up to a code of conduct? If so, what is included in the code of conduct? » From your perspective, what main challenges have you faced during the disbursement process? What would you suggest to improve the payment process for agents? HOW LONG From 20 to 45 minutes. SHOULD IT LAST? 23. Bailur & Esquivel-Korsiak, 2019. Understanding People’s Experiences with Identification: A Guide for Qualitative End-User Research on ID. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/795541561701481546 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 34 Direct observations DESCRIPTION This research method, also called “fly on the wall,” originates from ethnographic studies. As the name suggests, it is a non-interventionist observation method whereby the researcher observes behaviors and interactions in a realistic setting. Unlike service safari, this method assumes that the researcher has minimal influence and does not execute actions but only observes them. This method can be applied at a touchpoint associated with G2P payment delivery to observe the experiences of recipients and/or providers. WHEN SHOULD IT Direct observation is useful when the research questions focus on identifying the current BE USED? experiences of recipients at various touchpoints of the G2P payment process. It is also helpful to ascertain the factors influencing recipients’ adoption or satisfaction. It is used at a touchpoint where the recipient interacts with a specific aspect of the delivery process (e.g., awareness-raising initiatives, registration, payment delivery, or grievance redressal). This method can be used early in the qualitative research process. When applied prior to using a conversational method, it can yield valuable insights that inform specific questions about those topics that may not be disclosed in cases when participants are either unaware that it is unusual or if it is a common and widely accepted behavior. ADVANTAGES Direct observation enables researchers to differentiate between what individuals articulate in interviews and conversational methods, and what their actual behavior is in specific environments. DISADVANTAGES The researcher’s presence during observations may alter the situation being studied, especially after individuals notice their presence. This awareness can modify behaviors, resulting in bias and affecting the data’s reliability. Therefore, it is important to consider the use of various complementary research techniques. Additionally, this method relies on researchers meticulously documenting all observations. This requires a high level of focus and discipline on the part of researchers. WHO CAN It is advisable for researchers assigned to the role of observers to maintain a discreet appearance, PARTICIPATE? minimizing the likelihood of attracting attention from recipients or providers of G2P payments. Additionally, observers should position themselves in places that provide visibility on recipient interactions while generating minimal interference. Potential touchpoints for observation include government offices, service delivery centers, payment access points, and locations where complaints are filed. EXAMPLES OF Observations should adhere to structured guidelines to enhance the comparability of the QUESTIONS information collected. However, these guidelines should also include a blank space for recording THAT COULD BE emerging or non-standard information. Questions for the observer to keep in mind include: CONSIDERED » How long does it take for the recipient to receive assistance? » What actions does the recipient take while waiting? How is the environment in which the recipient is waiting? » How is the process of making a complaint? How much information should the recipient give to the provider? Is this information available for the recipient? HOW LONG Not more than 3 hours at a stretch to prevent researcher fatigue. SHOULD IT LAST? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 35 Tool 3: Research Methods 1. Complete the section regarding the research questions 3. After inputting all the methods into the tool, consult defined in Step 1 (Formulating research questions) and with your research team to determine if the defined indicate the sampling method to be used based on the set of methods is adequate for addressing the research decisions made in Step 2 (Choosing the sample). questions. Evaluate the team’s ability to execute the methods and make any necessary adjustments. 2. Keep both elements in sight and respond to each question in the decision flow as set out in the table 4. Consolidate the research plan and incorporate the below. If the answer to any question is yes, incorporate relevant sample information for each technique defined the resulting technique from this process into the in Step 2. relevant section of the tool. RESEARCH QUESTIONS Questions defined in Step 1. Do you need to directly observe the Do you need to know behavior of G2P payment recipients the behavior of G2P while attempting not to intervene? __________________________ payment recipients __________________________ within the context of their specific __________________________ Do you need to gather opinions on the circumstances? immediate experience of a recipient at a __________________________ G2P payment interaction point? __________________________ NO YES __________________________ __________________________ __________________________ Do you need to explore an individual Do you need to G2P payment experience that involves DECISION FLOW __________________________ thoroughly explore sensitive topics in greater depth? __________________________ the motivations, barriers, and __________________________ expectations behind Do you need to understand the general __________________________ recipient behavior? and shared perspectives of G2P payment recipients? NO YES Do you need to understand the Do you need to perspective of those who design, understand the G2P operate, or deliver G2P payments? SAMPLING METHOD payment delivery process and its main touchpoints? Snowball Do you need to experience the actions performed by the recipients Purposive to understand their journey with G2P NO YES payments? Quota UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 36 TOOL 3: RESEARCH METHODS RESEARCH METHOD This method allows you to confirm DIRECT specific hypotheses about how recipients naturally interact with the service OBSERVATIONS OR by identifying authentic behaviors, FLY IN THE WALL interactions, and emotions. SEGMENT(S) This method allows you to understand how INTERCEPT recipients or service providers perceive their interactions with the G2P payment INTERVIEWS delivery process in real-time and in the natural environment. This method involves conducting guided, RESEARCH METHOD semi-structured conversations in secure IN-DEPTH in-person or digital settings to gain INTERVIEWS a deep understanding of individual thoughts and experiences. This method encourages participant interaction and dialogue, allowing SEGMENT(S) FOCUS GROUP for exploring diverse opinions,shared DISCUSSIONS experiences, and group dynamics. This method can offer valuable insights into specific supply-side aspects of the KEY INFORMANT G2P payment process and often provides RESEARCH METHOD INTERVIEWS broader or more strategic perspective that may not be available directly from recipients. This method lets you experience a SEGMENT(S) service firsthand, just as a recipient would. By immersing themselves in SERVICE SAFARIS the user’s journey, researchers can gain deep insights into the various touchpoints across the delivery process, pain points, and overall usability. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 37 STEP 4. Developing data collection instruments Once the research team has defined the research method(s), data collection instruments need to be developed. Data collection instruments serve to direct a conversation or observation. They can be either structured (requiring strict adherence in every case), or semi-structured (permitting the exploration of emerging topics not covered in the original version). Whether the instruments are structured or semi-structured, it is important to remember that their primary value lies in their replicability. As research methods are applied across different individuals and contexts, instruments ensure that the collected data information is comparable. This facilitates the data analysis process to follow during Phase III. Defining the instruments is of utmost importance. If data collection guidelines are not properly constructed, research objectives may not be achieved due to omissions or because specific topics are prioritized over others that could be neglected during fieldwork implementation. Finally, specific instructions for interviews24 25, focus groups26 and/or service safaris27 should be included alongside the development of the instruments. This helps standardize the conditions under which each research method is applied, ensuring the validity of the data generated. The process of developing an instrument must be accompanied by a mechanism to systematically record the information. The specifics of this recording process will be addressed in greater depth in the next chapter (Phase II). The questions directed at recipients must be simple, straightforward, and focused on their personal experiences. The defined research questions for the project should not be applied directly to users; instead, they should be transformed into approachable queries for participants. 24. For an example of an in-depth interview instrument, see Annex 1: Interview instrument. 25. For an example of a key informant interview instrument, see Annex 2: Key informant interview instrument. 26. For an example of a focus group discussion instrument, see Annex 3: Focus group discussion instrument. 27. For an example of a service safari instrument, see Annex 4: Service safari instrument. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 38 The process of developing data collection instruments is known as operationalization and involves transforming the research objectives into analytical dimensions. This helps define questions or observational criteria to be applied in the field (see Tool 4). Box 2 discusses the use of visual stimuli to facilitate the data collection process. Box 2: The Use of Visual Stimuli in Qualitative Research for G2P Payments In some cases, it may be necessary to incorporate visual or audiovisual stimuli to elicit more meaningful data during the research process. Including images or graphics can be particularly beneficial when participants need to imagine scenarios they have not yet encountered. This approach is especially recommended in exploratory research settings, such as when digital payments have not been fully implemented or extended to specific population segments. Storyboards can facilitate recipients’ comprehension of proposed situations, thus enabling the collection of higher quality feedback. These storyboards may be presented in various formats (analog or digital) and can be employed for diverse conversational methods, such as interviews or focus groups. In these cases, the storyboard should be designed so as to provoke meaningful reactions from participants. In the context of G2P payments, both current and potential recipients should be presented with a storyboard illustrating the G2P payment delivery process. This visual aid serves to make abstract concepts more concrete and comprehensible for participants. It allows them to evaluate their alignment with the actions of a fictional character, thus facilitating the recognition of potential barriers or motivations associated with the adoption of digital payments (over traditional payment methods). Conversational methods can also incorporate various visual stimuli, particularly those that enable a more prolonged participant engagement. For instance, card sorting is particularly useful for generating rankings related to characteristics of various payment methods or for any other type of classification relevant to the research. Participants can be asked to organize topics, rank their choices, or indicate priorities, with a view to understanding their mental models and preferences. Card sorting can also be used to understand the reasons behind a recipient’s preferred choices and identify the significant bottlenecks they experienced. For example, participants can be given the option to select a payment service provider and subsequently asked why they made that choice. In general, any visual stimuli should enable participants to identify with the characters depicted, avoid generating bias, and adhere strictly to ethical guidelines. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 39 Tool 4: Operationalization Matrix To apply this operationalization tool, follow the steps outlined understandable by participants. Focus on making questions below: relevant to recipients’ personal experiences. If using observational techniques, ensure the criteria are simple and 1. Write the research questions identified in Step 1 in the visible to the researcher. first column of the table or matrix below. 5. Review the phrasing of the questions or observation criteria. 2. Identify key concepts related to each research question You may need to adjust the wording depending on the that you intend to investigate further. For example, in the method used (observational, conversational, group-based, case of a research question such as “what features of or individual). the payment method consider the particularities that the 6. Ensure that all fundamental concepts necessary for excluded or marginalized population may present?”, you answering the research questions are addressed in the may wish to explore certain issues more deeply, such as table below. segmentation, access to distribution channels, availability of financial access points and so on. 7. Organize the questions in a coherent order. A recommended approach is to start with more general or less sensitive 3. For each concept, indicate in the table whether you will questions and gradually move toward more specific ones. use an observational or conversational method. Create a document that includes the questions or 4. Draft one or more questions for each concept. If you observation criteria and clear instructions for those apply conversational techniques, ensure that the implementing the instruments. questions are open-ended, simple, and easily ARE THE QUESTIONS QUESTIONS OR RESEARCH CONCEPTS TO COMPREHENSIVE TYPE OF METHOD OBSERVABLE CRITERIA QUESTIONS INVESTIGATE FURTHER ENOUGH TO FULLY FOR FIELDWORK GRASP THE CONCEPT? Observational Yes ________________ Conversational Collective No,further ________________ review is Conversational necessary. ________________ individual ________________ ________________ Observational ________________ Conversational Collective Conversational individual Observational Conversational Collective Conversational individual UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 40 At the conclusion of Phase I, the research team should have developed a well-structured and relevant proposal capable of evaluating existing processes and informing the design, piloting, scaling, and/or enhancement of the current implementation of digital G2P payments. To this end, consensus must be reached on the following aspects: the significance of the research questions, the appropriateness of the selected samples, the team’s capacity to execute the proposed methodological techniques, and the comprehensiveness of the guidelines to be applied. Only after these elements are in place the team can proceed to the fieldwork and data collection in Phase II. However, if, during the execution of subsequent steps in this guide, it becomes necessary to redefine any aspect of the research design, it is possible to revisit the instructions from earlier stages and make the required adjustments. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 41 Ethical considerations Qualitative research seeks to explore and understand Understanding the cultural and gender norms of the context individuals’ subjective experiences through direct is particularly important when designing research instruments conversations and observations. Given the inherently and defining methods. This preparatory work ensures that personal nature of this approach, ethical considerations the study aligns with the lived realities of participants and must be embedded at every stage of the research process to enhances the validity of the data collected. ensure that the study adheres to the highest academic and methodological standards while safeguarding the rights and Furthermore, inclusive research practices are critical when dignity of participants. studying marginalized or vulnerable populations, such as recipients of G2P payments who may experience systemic A robust framework for ethical oversight is a critical part exclusion. Researchers must take deliberate steps to address of any qualitative research project. Research teams must these challenges and ensure the equitable representation of establish formal systems to address potential ethical such groups in their studies. When working with vulnerable violations, ensuring transparency and accountability. Despite populations, including individuals in fragile or violent the best intentions of researchers, participants may feel contexts, researchers must take extra precautions to avoid coerced, perceive inadequate opportunities to opt-out, or perceptions of coercion. Power imbalances—exacerbated by believe consent was obtained improperly. To address such differences in socio-economic status or the outsider status of concerns, research teams should implement clear procedures researchers—can affect the ability of participants to provide for handling complaints before initiating any fieldwork. At informed consent. This underscores the need for clear and a minimum, participants should have access to contact culturally appropriate communication of consent28, ensuring information from a designated field coordinator or lead participants fully understand their rights and the purpose of researcher to whom they can report concerns. the study. An independent ethical review board should also be set up Obtaining informed consent is a cornerstone of ethical with the authority to halt the study if informed consent qualitative research. The informed consent process should was not adequately obtained or other ethical standards are be among the first elements developed during the design of breached. Furthermore, the board should be notified of any research or data collection instruments. Participants must ethical complaints received. This will serve to further reinforce receive a clear explanation of the potential risks and benefits accountability and strengthen participants’ trust in the of their involvement, whether in pilot studies or in the main research process. research. This transparency fosters trust and is respectful of the autonomy of participants29. Ethical research design demands a commitment to cultural sensitivity and the avoidance of bias. Researchers must recognize that their own beliefs and norms—whether cultural, gender-related, or societal—may differ significantly from those of participants. While researchers are not required to adopt the norms of participants, they must respect them and structure their fieldwork activities accordingly. This respect extends to the formulation of research questions, as cultural biases can undermine the study’s relevance and methodological integrity. 28. Klapper & Singer, 2017. The Opportunities and Challenges of Digitizing Government-to-Person Payments, The World Bank Research Observer, Washington, D.C.: World Bank. https://ideas.repec. org/a/oup/wbrobs/v32y2017i2p211-226..html 29. Adapted from DIME Analytics at the World Bank guidance on protocols and elements of informed consent. Additional information available at DIME Wiki. Researchers outside the World Bank should make sure to comply with their own organization’s legal due diligence with obtaining informed consent as it may vary. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 42 INFORMED CONSENT30 CONDUCTING RESEARCH WITH MINORS To obtain informed consent, the researcher should generally Qualitative research involving minors requires heightened follow the steps below, though an Institutional Review Board ethical care and additional protection, given their vulnerability (IRB) may grant waivers for specific components31: and unique circumstances. Research on G2P recipients may need to study the experiences of minors, including young » Purpose and participation children, as they represent a significant proportion of those Explain the purpose of the research, including why the requiring assistance globally. This need is especially pressing participant was selected to participate. Emphasize that participation is voluntary, and the participant can withdraw for stateless children, those who have lost their parents, at any time or refuse to answer questions without penalty or those who have endured other significant hardships. To or loss of benefits. conduct ethical research with minors, researchers must go beyond standard ethical practices and implement additional » Procedures and time commitment safeguards tailored to this population. The implementation Provide a chronological description of the study procedures of processes like informed consent and confidentiality often (e.g., topics, timing, duration), identify any experimental components, and specify the total time commitment needs to be adapted when working with children, in full expected from participants. consideration of specific cultural and legal contexts. » Risks, benefits, and alternatives Researchers must ensure compliance with national laws and Outline foreseeable risks or discomforts and describe how policies governing research with minors in the countries where these will be managed. Clearly state whether participants the study is being conducted. Moreover, these processes will benefit directly or if the research benefits society at large. Inform participants of any available alternatives to should account for the age, gender, and cultural background of participation. the child to ensure their appropriateness and effectiveness. » Compensation While the exact approaches may vary, essential ethical Mention any payments or gifts provided as compensation principles and practical considerations are non-negotiable for participants’ time, ensuring that the compensation is when conducting research with children. These include non-coercive. ensuring their safety, securing consent but also permission » Confidentiality from guardians, maintaining confidentiality, and minimizing Describe measures to protect the data of participants, risks associated with participation (see Box 3). including access restrictions and secure storage and management of identifying records. » Contact information Provide the names and contact details of the field coordinator, research team members, and lead researcher for questions about the study. Include information about Researchers must proactively contacting an oversight body to report complaints or create conditions that prevent concerns. ethical breaches during the study. » Consent and acknowledgement This includes designing culturally Include a statement confirming that participants understand the procedures, risks, and benefits and sensitive methods, maintaining have had their questions answered. Provide a space participant confidentiality, for participants to sign, indicating their agreement to participate. and safeguarding personally » Sponsor details identifiable information. If applicable, disclose the name of the study sponsor. 30. For an example of informed consents, see Annex 5: Informed consent template for recipients, and Annex 6: Informed consent template for key informant interviews. 31. Examples of written consent templates can be found on the World Bank DIME Standards GitHub repository. https://github.com/worldbank/dime-standards/tree/master/dime-research-standards/pillar-1- research-ethics/research-ethics-resources/informed-consent-templates. Researchers are encouraged to adapt these templates to suit the specific context and ethical requirements of their study while ensuring compliance with any relevant legal and institutional guidelines. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 43 Box 3: Ethical Principles for the Participation of Children in Qualitative Research NON-NEGOTIABLE ETHICAL PRINCIPLES » Parental/Guardian consent: Informed consent must be obtained from a child’s parent or legal guardian before any interaction with the child. » Child assent: Once parental consent is secured, children must be fully informed about the study in age-appropriate terms, and their verbal or written consent should be sought. » Right to refuse: Children have the right to refuse participation, to decline being photographed, audio or video recorded, or to remain silent. They may also withdraw from the study at any time, even if their parent or guardian has consented. » Confidentiality: All information shared by children must remain strictly confidential. » Support for distress: If a child experiences distress during an interview or discussion, researchers are responsible for ensuring that relevant follow-up resources are available. » Awareness of rights: Researchers must address the inherent power imbalance between adult researchers and children by making children aware of their rights and responsibilities in the study. » Acceptance of views: Children’s perspectives and accounts must not be dismissed or doubted; their input should be accepted as they express it. » Safety: Children must feel safe at all times during the study, including during transportation to and from the research site. ADDITIONAL GUIDELINES FOR CREATING AN ENABLING ENVIRONMENT » Friendly atmosphere: Maintain an informal and approachable environment to help children feel at ease. » Respect for children’s perspectives: Clearly communicate to children that their experiences and insights are valued, and researchers are there to learn from them. » Pre-study preparation: Familiarize yourself with key aspects of the children’s lives and cultural context to engage with them effectively. » Anticipating challenges: Brainstorm potential challenges that might arise during the study and establish support systems to address them. » Gender sensitivity: Ensure the availability of male or female field staff to accommodate children’s preferences regarding the gender of the interviewer. » Respectful interaction: Maintain a respectful demeanor and observe a safe physical distance to ensure the children’s comfort and safety. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase I. Research design and methodology 44 Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection This section is intended to provide a guide for Phase II, during which the design plans are implemented through fieldwork and data collection. 45 The second phase involves putting Phase II the research design and plan STEPS & TOOLS defined in Phase I into practice. 5. Assembling the fieldwork During this phase, the team will team conduct fieldwork and collect data. They will engage directly with 6. Planning the fieldwork Tool 5: Fieldwork Plan potential or existing recipients of G2P payments to operationalize 7. Conducting the fieldwork qualitative research, ensuring 8. Recording and collecting adherence to the outlined ethical observations considerations. Tool 6: Note-taking Forms 9. Conducting debriefing sessions Tool 7: Research Wall PHASE OUTCOME The fieldwork will generate comprehensive observational notes, audio recordings, photographs, and audiovisual materials, all collected in compliance with applicable ethical standards. These records will form the basis of the data analysis to be conducted during Phase III. 46 STEP 5. Assembling the fieldwork team Qualified teams and relevant training are needed to ensure that high-quality data is collected during this phase of the project. Staff involved in data collection, or its supervision, must be fully trained in their roles and responsibilities. These should be clearly defined so that all staff understand the elements for which they are accountable. Effective teamwork is necessary for a smooth execution of the research plan. All team members, regardless of their specific roles, must have a comprehensive understanding of the research objectives. Equally important is the need for dedicated training sessions that explain the qualitative methods, the methodological guidelines, and the mechanisms for documenting the data collected. Additionally, the research team must be thoroughly briefed on the characteristics of the G2P payment process being studied. Every member of the research team should be thoroughly trained on the ethical standards governing the research and remain fully aware of these obligations throughout the fieldwork. Staffing configurations should align with each of the stages of data collection. While each study will require a unique staffing structure, key roles for qualitative research include lead researchers, trainers, field coordinators, data managers, facilitators or moderators, and notetakers. In some cases, roles may overlap, such as when lead researchers serve as trainers or facilitators and notetakers switch roles to assist with participant mobilization. The number of teams needed depends on the study size, context, and budget. Table 3 provides some general guidelines for establishing a qualitative research team. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 47 TABLE 3: KEY PERSONNEL AND THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES. ROLE RESPONSABILITIES LEAD RESEARCHER » Senior staff, typically from the research organization, oversee the entire research process. 1 - 2 people Responsibilities include ensuring methodological integrity, training the research team, and supervising data collection and analysis. » The lead researcher should establish a regular check-in schedule, particularly with the field coordinator(s) and data manager(s), to monitor any unexpected circumstances and gain firsthand knowledge of the data produced during the research. » They may also serve as the designated contact person for reporting any violations of ethical protocols. FIELD COORDINATOR » The field coordinator is a core research team member and typically reports directly to the 1 - 2 people lead researcher. » They are responsible for coordinating all qualitative research activities, including leading post- debriefs and ensuring the preparation of debriefing notes. » In addition to overseeing data management and storage, they conduct quality checks on the moderators’ transcriptions and translations of recordings. » They also compile the electronic data and send it to the lead researcher, ensuring that all collected information meets required standards. » The field coordinator may also be the contact person for reporting ethical protocol violations and act as the primary point of communication between the lead researcher and the rest of the field team. DATA MANAGER » The data manager is typically a staff member of the research organization and reports 1 - 2 people directly to the lead researcher. » They are primarily responsible for managing the safe storage of all collected data while maintaining confidentiality. » In addition, the data manager monitors all incoming and outgoing data, ensuring accuracy and compliance with established protocols. » They work closely with the field coordinator to oversee all other aspects of data management, providing seamless data flow and integrity throughout the research process. FACILITATORS/ » Facilitators can be existing staff members of the research organization or recruited explicitly MODERATORS for the study. Depends on the amount » They report to the field coordinator and are responsible for leading and moderating focus of research sessions. group discussions, key informant interviews, in-depth interviews, direct observations, or other For example, one predefined qualitative techniques. facilitator may lead two » They are accountable for ensuring that all fieldwork adheres to established methodological focus groups daily, two guidelines and ethical protocols. in-depth interviews, six » In addition, they actively participate in post-data collection debriefs. Facilitators are often interception interviews, tasked with transcribing audio recordings in the local language and translating these or three observational transcripts into the preferred language for analysis, ensuring accuracy and consistency. techniques. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 48 ROLE RESPONSABILITIES NOTETAKERS » Notetakers may be existing staff members of the research organization or specifically Depends on the number recruited for the study. of research sessions » They are responsible for documenting field notes during each session and supporting the planned. Generally, facilitator in ensuring that all fieldwork adheres to methodological standards and ethical they work in pairs with protocols. facilitators. » In addition, notetakers manage audio recordings and/or photography during each session. » After each discussion, they expand the field notes to provide more detailed accounts. » They also actively participate in post-data collection debriefs to contribute to the overall analysis and interpretation process. MOBILIZERS / » Mobilizers and recruiters make the initial approach to communities, selecting participants RECRUITERS according to the established criteria, ensuring participant attendance at research sessions, 2 - 3 people and preparing the setup before the participants arrive. » Additionally, recruiters manage participant contact lists, ensuring that all data is handled in compliance with ethical and confidentiality standards. Along with implementing strategies to secure participation, recruiters may also distribute participation incentives. » For observational techniques, they coordinate visits by arranging meetings with the individuals responsible for each location and handling any necessary authorization requests. » Recruiters and mobilizers must receive clear and detailed instructions throughout the research process to perform their duties effectively and ensure smooth participant recruitment and engagement. Since facilitators and notetakers play a critical role in data collection and serve as the primary representatives of the research to the communities involved (especially in conversational techniques), it is essential to dedicate significant time and resources to their recruitment and training. Any effective training program for facilitators and notetakers must include several core components (see Table 4). Given that field researchers may need to switch roles during the research, all team members must be trained in each area. Their ability to function as a cohesive team is paramount. Moderators and notetakers must practice, work closely together, and interact consistently throughout the data collection process. The success of qualitative research hinges on this collaboration: ineffective moderation will lead to inadequate responses, while poor note-taking will hinder the analysis of even well-moderated discussions. Table 4 outlines the minimum activities required to train facilitators/moderators and notetakers to function effectively as a team during the data collection phase. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 49 TABLE 4: KEY TRAINING COMPONENTS FOR FACILITATORS AND NOTETAKERS. TRAINING TOPICS FOR FACILITATORS TRAINING TOPICS FOR NOTETAKERS Group dynamics, participant engagement, and support Field notetaking and elaboration » Establishing positive group dynamics » Taking accurate and comprehensive field notes » Managing and leading discussions effectively and » Expanding field notes post-session conducting field interviews and observations » Observing and documenting non-verbal cues effectively » Using probing questions to deepen participant responses » Participating in post-data collection debriefs to clarify » Addressing and resolving problems during discussions and complete notes » Upholding participant rights and confidentiality » Clarifying naming conventions for notetaking » Managing participant emotions and addressing disruptive behavior Data management and recording » Clarifying questions to ensure participants’ understanding » Managing recording and photography » Addressing and managing personal value judgments » Ensuring participant confidentiality and data security TRAINING TOPICS FOR BOTH FACILITATORS AND NOTETAKERS Team collaboration and ethical practice Preparation and Coordination » Addressing and resolving issues during discussions » Practicing moderation and note-taking in mock sessions » Working collaboratively to ensure objective compliance » Ensuring preparedness by reviewing materials before and data completeness fieldwork » Familiarity with ethical guidelines, consent forms, and » Setting up and organizing discussion sites procedures » Coordinating post-data collection debriefs » Understanding vulnerability factors in various contexts UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 50 STEP 6. Planning the fieldwork Planning fieldwork is a critical operational activity in qualitative research. It sets the foundation for coordinating efforts among team members and achieving research objectives. While detailed planning is essential, it is equally important to build flexibility into the process to account for unexpected challenges, such as difficulty accessing participants or locations, budgetary constraints, or other unforeseen circumstances beyond the team’s control. The planning process should be firmly rooted in the methodological framework developed in the previous phase, incorporating relevant ethical considerations as well as practical operational factors. Although the primary responsibility for this process rests with the lead researcher and the field coordinator, all team members are expected to adhere to the plan and contribute to its implementation. To ensure a comprehensive and effective plan for fieldwork and data collection, the following components must be in place: » Ethical protocols for fieldwork which explicitly incorporate the recommendations presented at the end of this section; » Detailed methodological instruments for implementing each research method outlined in the study; » Teams that are fully assembled and trained according to their assigned roles and responsibilities; » Access to contact information for potential participants and/or field observation sites, alongside the criteria for their selection; and » Clear methodological guidelines for documenting field data, including note-taking templates, audio and video recording instructions, data management forms, and naming conventions, and any other necessary procedures. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 51 Box 4 below discusses the importance of conducting a pilot test as part of fieldwork planning. Box 4: The Importance of Pilot Testing in Fieldwork Planning Conducting a pilot test of the research plan as part of the fieldwork planning process is strongly recommended. The pilot phase helps identify potential adjustments to improve participant comprehension and provides more accurate estimates of the time required for each technique and procedure. Pilot testing involves abbreviating the application of the methodological and operational elements developed in previous steps. It should be carried out before the full rollout of the study to address any issues well in advance. Allocating sufficient time and resources for the pilot phase is crucial to preventing problems during the study. Once pilot results are incorporated, and necessary adjustments made, the team can proceed with full fieldwork implementation. Lead researchers should draft research instruments for pilot testing. They may also collaborate with local research organizations to ensure context, feasibility, and validity. Pilot test consent language and procedures should also be developed alongside the field instruments. Key recommendations for an effective pilot include the following: » Conducting pilot testing only after all research staff have been trained, and data collection instruments are finalized for pre-pilot use; » Selecting pilot testing locations with characteristics similar to, but geographically distinct from, the actual research sites to avoid conditioning participants before the main study; » Including as many population groups as possible in the pilots, subject to financial and time constraints; and » Reserving sufficient time and resources to modify tools and processes based on the results of the pilot. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 52 For a successful data collection process, once training, data management forms, and naming conventions have been finalized, preparations for fieldwork must be managed carefully and include the following logistical arrangements: » Coordinating the necessary arrangements for the transportation of the research team and participants to the locations defined in the research plan; » Ensuring the availability of private and quiet spaces for conducting qualitative conversational techniques, such as in-depth interviews, key informant interviews, or focus group discussions; » Obtaining the necessary authorizations when applying qualitative observation techniques in private or public spaces; » Sending reminders to participants to increase participation rates and, if the team has previously established them, ensure the availability of incentives to be distributed; » If necessary, provide identification materials such as credentials or official letters to field researchers; » Establishing instant communication channels for the research team; » Ensuring that all necessary materials are prepared, including guidelines, consent forms, or storyboards, if applicable; » Ensuring the availability of recording devices for all research sessions, making certain that they have sufficient memory and battery life,; » Facilitating internet access for both participants and the research team, particularly if remote techniques will be applied,; » Arranging for food or beverages to be provided, to create a comfortable environment and foster trust for the interview or focus group,; » Providing periodic work plans and activity schedules, ideally organized by facilitator/ notetaker pairs, to facilitate coordination as a team; and » Scheduling debriefing sessions for the relevant team members. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 53 Tool 5: Fieldwork Plan This tool provides step-by-step instructions for organizing the 7. Enlist and verify that all necessary materials are necessary elements of fieldwork and can be adjusted according available and in working order. Ensure that digital to specific team requirements: devices have sufficient battery life and memory. For analog materials, such as guides, consent forms, or cards (e.g., for card sorting activities), confirm that 1. Create a planning sheet or dashboard that is accessible to there are enough copies, that they are in good all team members. The table below provides a standard condition, and that they are free of markings from example. previous activities. The field coordinator should 2. Describe the activity to be conducted, specifying the conduct this verification, and later, the individual or technique and type of participants. It is advisable to create pair responsible for executing the activity. a simple indicative identification code that can be shared with the entire team. For example, in the case of a first in-person focus group with female payment recipients aged 30-45 from a rural area, the identification code could be TYPE OF ACTIVITY DATE AND TIME 1.FGD_W_35-45_R. For a second intercept interview session (Code) (Start + End Time) in a public office, the code could be 2.II_PUB.OFF. 3. Complete the date and time for each scheduled activity, 1.FGP_W_35-45_R Oct 13th specifying both the start time and the estimated end time. 15:00 to 16:30 4. Indicate in the dashboard whether the activity will be conducted remotely or in-person. For in-person activities, specify the transportation method and the exact address. For remote activities, provide the digital platform and/or the meeting link. 5. Specify the individuals responsible for the activity, identifying who will be the facilitator and who will take notes. If there are different recruiters within the team, they should also be named, along with any distinct field coordinators. 6. Indicate how many have confirmed their participation, and the total number expected to participate, particularly if the activity requires prior scheduling of recipients or critical 2.II_PUB.OFF Oct 16th informants. In this way, activities can be better managed 9:00 to 10:30 and adjustments can be made if not enough participants have committed to attending (with the activity being rescheduled if necessary). 3.FGR_M_ 35-45 Oct 18th 9:00 to 11:00 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 54 TOOL 5: FIELDWORK PLAN 8. Indicate the type of recording that will be made during 9. The last column, where specific observations can be the activity. Similar to codes for activity type, it is recorded by activity, is optional. advisable to use codes that facilitate subsequent identification of records and their association with a specific activity or date. For example, if the activity includes photographic records and notes, the records could be coded as (PH)_II_PUB.OFF_1 for photographs and (NT)_II_PUB.OFF_1 for notes. SETTING NO. OF RESPONSIBLE (Location and CONFIRMED CHECKLIST OF REQUIRED TYPE OF RECORDING (Facilitator, Notetaker OBSERVATIONS Transport or PARTICIPANTS / MATERIALS (Code) and Recruiter) Platform and Link) TOTAL Room 4, City F:_______ 5/6 ☐ Methodological guidelines 1.(NT)FGP_W_35- University ☐ 6 informed consent forms 45_R NT:_______ Transport by ☐ 3 sets of cards for card 1.(AU)FGP_W_35- van from the R:_______ sorting 45_R hotel at 14:00. ☐ Audio recorder ☐ Video recorder 1.(VI)FGP_W_35- 45_R ☐ Notebook ☐ Incentives ☐ Credentials ☐ 8 chairs ☐ 1 big table ☐ Food and beverages General Hall, F:_______ N/A ☐ Methodological guidelines 2.(PH)_II_PUB. The activity Municipal ☐ 12 informed consent forms OFF_1 will be Building NT:_______ reconfirmed ☐ Audio recorder 2.(NT)_II_PUB. one day prior, Transport by R:_______ ☐ Photo camera OFF_1 depending van from the ☐ Notebook on weather hotel at 08:00 conditions. ☐ Credentials ☐ Municipal authorization Zoom F:_______ 6/6 ☐ Methodological guidelines 3.(PH)_FGR_M_ https://zoom. ☐ Notebook 35-45 us/j/5551112222 NT:_______ 3.(NT)_ FGR_M_ R:_______ 35-45 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 55 STEP 7. Conducting the fieldwork Before initiating fieldwork, the entire research team must become familiar with the location and cultural characteristics of the G2P payment recipients involved in the study. It is also important to provide the community with clear information about the research objectives while ensuring strict confidentiality regarding the identities and opinions of participants. The role of the community mobilizer or recruiter is vital in establishing trust and fostering a respectful approach. This is fundamental for successful engagement with the community (see Box 5). Box 5: Professionalism and Cultural Sensitivity in Fieldwork The successful implementation of any research method requires that all research team members—especially recruiters, facilitators, and notetakers—exhibit appropriate behavior, from general demeanor and appearance to manners and etiquette. It is essential to establish rapport and build trust with participants. Field researchers should ensure that participants understand that, despite being outsiders, researchers will be respectful of their community and culture. To this end, the initial impression of participants about field staff —and the wider community— is critical. Researchers should be mindful of their appearance and dress in a comfortable and culturally appropriate manner. They should wear modest, comfortable shoes, and avoid wearing expensive jewelry, clothing, or accessories. Skin (e.g., knees and shoulders) must be covered according to local customs. Implementing any research method requires facilitators and notetakers to comprehensively understand the rules and instructions governing each activity and commit to following every instruction in the methodological and ethical protocols. Since techniques vary depending on the use of conversational or observational methods, recommendations have been made separately for each one. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 56 These can be conducted remotely or in person, indoors or outdoors. If the discussion is conducted remotely, the recruitment process should make sure that all participants have the necessary infrastructure, tech support, and assistance needed to join from a remote device. For indoor venues, it is essential to verify that windows and doors can be securely opened or closed as required. Proper ventilation is important for participant comfort; however, it is equally critical (for audio quality purposes) to minimize noise from windows and doors swinging open and closed in the breeze. In outdoor settings, finding a location that provides maximum privacy to maintain participant confidentiality CONVERSATIONAL should be a priority. METHODS The research team should arrive well before the scheduled start time on the Typically include in-depth day that fieldwork is scheduled to begin and verify if the venue is adequately interviews, intercept interviews, prepared. Enough chairs should be made available if it is culturally appropriate key participant interviews, and for participants to sit on chairs. Conversely, if sitting on the floor is culturally focus group discussions. relevant, a rug or other suitable floor seating should be provided. Any materials required for the study should be placed in a central location, including chart paper, mapping tools, and writing implements. When waiting for seated interviews, it is essential to be polite and patient and greet the participant warmly upon their entrance (see Box 6 on building rapport). Each participant should be asked to confirm, once again, if this is a convenient time for them. If the session involves additional participants, those present should be invited to take a seat. However, once the requisite minimum number of participants have arrived, the session should begin on schedule. Box 6: Behavioral Techniques for Facilitators to Build Rapport 32 » Foster a relaxed, positive atmosphere by being friendly, approachable, and using a pleasant tone. Put participants at ease and maintain a high level of energy throughout the session. » Smile, make eye contact, and use relaxed body language, incorporating humor when appropriate. A good sense of humor can help create a more comfortable environment for discussion. » Be patient and respectful. Avoid rushing participants, scolding them, or judging their responses. Establish mutual respect by treating all participants with dignity, especially in group settings. Show active listening and sensitivity to participants’ needs and feelings. » Maintain a humble attitude and refrain from coercing participants into specific answers. 32. Adapted from Mack, Woodsong, MacQueen, Guest & Namey, 2005. Qualitative Research Methods: A Data Collector’s Field Guide, by Family Health International. www.fhi360.org/sites/ default/files/media/documents/Qualitative%20 Research%20Methods%20-%20A%20Data%20 Collector%27s%20Field%20Guide.pdf UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 57 At the beginning of each session, instructions and information regarding informed consent should be given. To this end, the researcher should follow the steps outlined below: » Reiterate that the purpose of the exercise is to gather the thoughts and opinions of participants exclusively regarding the delivery G2P payments. » Remind them that the field team will not disclose anything concerning their participation in the study with anyone other than the members of the research team. » Emphasize that there are no wrong answers and that all opinions are valid and valued. » Underscore that participation in this research will not be associated with any positive or negative consequences for the participants, and that they have the right to withdraw from the study at any time without the need to explain. » Remind participants that by signing the consent form33, they agree not to discuss any details of the activity once they leave the site. » Briefly explain the mechanism that will be used to document the session, which may include audio recordings, photographs, videos, and notes. Reassure participants that all documentation will be handled in accordance with ethical guidelines and confidentiality protocols. If a focus group or any other collective conversational technique is being conducted, the instructions may also include the following: » Ask participants to treat each other with respect, i.e. to not do anything that would embarrass or discomfort others, such as name-calling, criticizing someone else’s responses, and so on. » Request that respondents speak one at a time. Emphasize that everyone will have an opportunity to contribute but that due to the requirements for note-taking (and/or audio or video recordings), participants need to take turns while speaking. » Indicate that the facilitator may interrupt the participants if something is unclear, if people begin to speak simultaneously, or if someone is disrespectful toward others or disrupts the discussion in any way. Once these instructions have been made clear to all participants, the facilitation can proceed according to the instruments discussed in Step 4 (Developing data collection instruments). Next is step-by-step guide for researchers moderating and facilitating different types of data collection activities. 33. Details regarding the signing of informed consent forms and other ethical considerations are elaborated in the Ethical section at the end of this phase. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 58 CONVERSATIONAL METHODS Interception interviews » Invite participants to join in a friendly and encouraging manner. Do not insist if individuals decline to participate on the first attempt. » Introduce yourself using your name and present any relevant credentials. Additionally, inform participants if someone is taking notes or recording the session. » Briefly explain to participants the purpose of the activity (i.e. gathering diverse perspectives regarding recent experiences with G2P payments), the duration of the activity, and the importance of their participation. » Be prepared to answer any questions raised by participants, as they may not have been recruited in advance. Providing clarity about the process at the onset is essential. » Maintain a positive attitude and actively listen to responses. Encourage participants to elaborate on their comments. » Reinforce the fact that if participants are experiencing any issues with the G2P payment process, it is not within your role to resolve those problems. » Explicitly thank participants for their involvement and for agreeing to sign the informed consent form. In-depth interviews » Introduce yourself, including any information that may help establish a more personal connection and build rapport, and present any official identification. Invite the participants to introduce themselves, allowing them to share any content or topics they wish to discuss. » Demonstrate a curious and open attitude while listening. Practice empathetic listening to understand the situations and stories being shared. » Be flexible in the case of interruptions that may require the participant to step away. Afterward, invite them to resume the interview or, if necessary, reschedule for another time. » Maintain neutrality in your questions and reactions. Participants must not feel judged or misunderstood in their narratives. » Know when to dig deeper into a particular issue. Familiarity with the guide is essential, as discussions may unfold in an unexpected order, requiring you to make decisions about which questions to prioritize and which topics to explore further, including any planned activities. » When concluding the interview, express gratitude for the participant’s contributions and their willingness to participate, and consider reminding them of the points outlined in the informed consent form. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 59 Focus group discussions » Facilitate the discussion neutrally without influencing the participants’ responses. Approach the role as a curious learner rather than a teacher, guiding the conversation to foster an open exchange of ideas. » Address all questions outlined in the discussion guide. Allow sufficient time for probing responses and maintain participant engagement throughout the session. » Be adaptable and ready to think on your feet. Rephrase any questions that participants do not understand and be prepared to extemporaneously formulate follow-up questions and probes. » Encourage equal participation among all participants, especially in focus group discussions where opinions may vary. Manage both agreement and disagreement respectfully and foster a constructive debate. » Avoid leading questions that suggest specific answers. Instead, ask unbiased questions to elicit genuine responses, such as, “How did you feel when signing up for the G2P benefits?” » Understand the focus group guide and research objectives thoroughly and practice probing as a critical skill. Use effective probes to encourage elaboration, such as: “What do you mean when you say…,” “Can you tell me more…,” or “Can you give me an example of X?” » Maintain active listening to capture relevant elements that may not have been explicitly stated. Stay attentive to non-verbal cues and subtle nuances in participants’ responses. This will help you formulate additional questions as needed. » If possible, attempt to link ideas and identify patterns across responses that can be validated within the focus group context. At the same time, make sure you avoid biasing or forcing agreements or interpretations. » Provide clear instructions for any visual stimuli or activities incorporated during the discussion. Offer support if participants feel confused about how to engage in the activity. » Manage the time effectively throughout the discussion. While it is not necessary to explicitly ask every question in the guide, ensure that all relevant topics are covered within the agreed-upon timeframe. Participants should not be expected to extend their availability beyond what was initially arranged. Key informant interviews » Introduce yourself by presenting your official credentials. Invite the participants to introduce themselves and describe the role they perform. » Maintain an attitude of active and respectful listening. Participants should not feel judged for the responses they provide. » Stay attuned to the flow of the conversation as new and relevant elements may emerge. It may be necessary to explore specific topics in greater depth, even if these were not initially included in the interview guide. » After the interview, express gratitude for the valuable insights provided by the key informant. Indicate that the research will consider these perspectives and combine them with the viewpoints of actual recipients. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 60 OBSERVATIONAL METHODS The research team must adhere to established guidelines, and when required, (e.g., Direct observation or service provide detailed instructions to those overseeing the space in which the safaris). observations occur. Below is a practical step-by-step guide for using such methods. Direct observations » Position yourself comfortably in a location that allows you to easily observe the interactions identified as most relevant to the research. » Maintain an attentive attitude toward the social dynamics that unfold. Observe and listen to what is happening while respecting the privacy of the individuals concerned. Participants must remain unaware of being observed, as the intention is not for the observation process to alter their behavior. » Retain key details of the ongoing interactions to keep an active memory and ensure the note-taking process is as comprehensive as possible. » Conduct observations at various times of the week, day, and hour to capture differences that may arise during interaction peaks. Service safaris » Implement this technique using individuals who convincingly portray themselves as G2P payment recipients. Avoid using credentials or any materials that might identify the researcher conducting the service safari, as this could alter the behavior of those being observed and compromise the integrity of the research. » Follow the instructions outlined in the research guidelines, which should specify the execution of a particular task related to a G2P payment. » Actively commit to memory any critical details of the ongoing interactions observed in order to ensure that the subsequent note-taking process is as comprehensive as possible. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 61 STEP 8. Recording and collecting observations Accurately and comprehensively recording information is crucial in qualitative research and forms the basis for all subsequent analyses. Data collection can make use of a wide array of materials, so a very organized approach is required throughout the process, from preparation and fieldwork to post-collection analysis (see Box 7). During these stages, it is essential for the research team to agree on a well-defined recording criteria and ensure they are sufficiently comprehensive to capture all pertinent information and feasible for implementation in the field. The most common ways of recording information include field notes, audio recordings, video recordings, and photographs. Each of these is typically associated with specific research methods and presents distinct advantages and disadvantages as well as unique ethical considerations. Note-taking is the most ubiquitous mechanism for recording data across qualitative research methods. As outlined in Step 5 (Assembling the fieldwork team), it is advisable to designate specific individuals to fulfill this role throughout the research process. This will ensure the completeness of the information and strict adherence to note-taking instructions. It also makes the analysis and comparison of the data more straightforward. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 62 For observational methods, such as direct observations or service safaris, recording guidelines are needed to distinguish the most relevant content from secondary information. For conversational methods, note-taking can complement audio or audiovisual recordings. It provides additional context to audio files by capturing visible elements and highlighting emerging reactions and relevant topics that may warrant further exploration34. To take notes effectively, it is important for the team to develop a shared definition guide in advance of conducting the data collection. In addition, field notes should be reviewed and expanded within 24 hours of the conclusion of a research session. This will help document aspects that may have been overlooked during fast-paced sessions and to more precisely organize the content for effective analysis. Ideally, elaborated notes should include a descriptive narrative that recounts the session’s activities and the insights acquired, as well as significant quotes that may contribute to the analysis. To enhance the effectiveness of the documentation, supplementing the notes with insights gained during the scheduled debriefing is also advisable. Box 7: Systematic Organization of Qualitative Data Collection A systematic approach to organizing qualitative data collection is essential for the success of any research study. By ensuring careful planning, preparation, and documentation strategies, researchers can significantly enhance the integrity and reliability of their findings. To effectively manage the wide array of materials required during fieldwork, researchers should prepare a sturdy packet for each research session. Each packet should include all necessary materials and standardized forms to facilitate organization, written and visual materials, audio, photographic, and video devices. It should be assembled before each exercise and collected by the supervisor upon completion or at the end of the day. Each packet should be clearly labeled with information as to its contents, ensuring that all materials related to a single focus group, interview, service safari, or observation exercise are consolidated in a single location. Tool 6 provides a step-by-step guide for note-taking and two sample forms (one for intercept interviews and another for focus group discussions). These simple forms are intended to be replicable and can help standardize the note-taking process during fieldwork. 34. Greenbaum TL. The Handbook for Focus Group Research. New York: Lexington Books, 1993. Krueger RA. Moderating Focus Groups (Focus Group Kit). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1997. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 63 Tool 6: Note-taking Forms 1. Using one of the forms below, indicate the type of 3. In some cases, it may be beneficial to gather observable research method being applied, along with characteristics information about certain individuals, especially those that will make it easy to identify each application. This that have not been selected in advance and for which should include, at a minimum, the date, time, location, there is no prior knowledge of any socio-demographic and technique used, along with the names of the characteristics or relationship with G2P payments. For facilitator(s). intercept interview cases, see the second form. 2. Allocate identification codes for each activity. A good 4. Create your own version of these forms, leaving space example was provided earlier under Tool 5 (Field Work blank for the information to be completed. For instance, if Plan). For a first in-person focus group with female the initial questions of a focus group discussion pertain payment recipients aged 30-45 from a rural area, an to how participants became aware of the G2P payment appropriate identification code could be method, incorporate that analytical dimension into the 1.FGP_W_35-45_R. first section of the form. FOCUS GROUP DISCUSSIONS: SAMPLE RECORDING FORM. DATE QUESTION OR Oct 13th DIMENSION OF RESPONSES REACTIONS ANALYSIS TIME 15:00 to 16:30 #0 Layout Sitting chart (in case of a physical FGD) 1 2 3 4 LOCATION Room 4, City University M NT NOTETAKER Insert name 5 6 7 8 #1 Awareness Long waiting time (X) Frustration ID CODE Unclear what documents were needed (X) 1.FGP_W_35-45_R The support of community leaders was essential ( ) ID RECORD (NT)1.FGP_W_35- #2 Motivations 45_R # Card sorting Significant level of ADDITIONAL Number of agreement among the preferences Description Pros Cons group members. mentions? COMMENTS No additional comments ||||| MTN UBA NATSAVE # Emerged contents UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 64 TOOL 6: NOTE-TAKING FORMS 5. Once the first column containing the guide’s content is 7. If any visual activities, such as card sorting, were used established, add blank spaces to document emergent during the session, provide a general observation of the elements from the conversation that were not included in outcomes, including any diagrams that may be useful. the original guide. At this stage, the research team can 8. Include one column for recording the direct responses determine the most relevant criteria for documentation. and, ideally, another column for capturing reactions, This discussion is particularly significant for observational attitudes, and any non-verbal cues that the audio record research techniques. may not capture. 6. Ensure that there is sufficient space for documenting 9. Finally, organize and complement the information verbal exchanges and diagrams that may prove helpful. collected to prepare for the debriefing session. For instance, a diagram illustrating the seating arrangement of participants helps facilitate their identification by name. When using direct observation, allocate enough space for the notetaker to provide a layout of the environment and attention flows. INTERCEPT INTERVIEW: SAMPLE RECORDING FORM. DATE OBSERVABLE __ Female __Ages 18 to 30 Time spent on attention Oct 13th CHARACTERISTICS __ Male __ Ages 30 to 45 ________ __ Other __ Ages 45 to 60 __ Ages 60 and above TIME 9:00 to 10:30 QUESTION OR DIMENSION OF RESPONSES REACTIONS LOCATION ANALYSIS General Hall, Municipal Building #0 Layout NOTETAKER Insert name ID ACTIVITY 2.II_PUB.OFF #1 Reason for coming to the location ID RECORD (NT)_II_PUB.OFF_1 ADDITIONAL #2 Overall evaluation of COMMENTS the experience The observation period is characterized by high congestion and demand for services. # Emerged contents UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 65 Audio recordings are vital for documenting focus group discussions, in-depth interviews, or interviews with key informants. Depending on the team’s requirements and available budget, audiovisual recordings may also be taken. Recordings facilitate the subsequent transcription of audio files, converting them into text for detailed analysis by the research team. Photographic documentation, which can record the outcomes of certain activities, is particularly useful when the team needs to investigate observable behaviors and interactions in interviews and focus groups discussions (e.g., during card sorting exercises and modification of visual stimuli by participants). The detailed management and monitoring of registration files is essential for organizing the research work and preventing the loss of valuable information. This practice not only facilitates the achievement of research objectives but also ensures compliance with the administrative commitments undertaken. Each research plan should consider one or more types of documentation as part of its methodological design decisions. This approach will facilitate the organization of available forms and devices, the collection of relevant materials from the field, and the transmission to designated storage locations for information. The responsibility for this organization typically falls to the field coordinator, supported by facilitators and notetakers. Reviewed files are then submitted to the data manager, who organizes the files in a structure conducive to analysis. To maintain a systematic and transparent order for effective monitoring and analysis, all files should be labeled using appropriate identification codes. Examples of such coding were provided in Tool 5 and Tool 6, and Table 5 provides additional examples. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 66 TABLE 5: EXAMPLES OF IDENTIFICATION CODES FOR RECORDING FILES. RECORDING ID CODE APPLIED FOR EACH SESSION (IN THIS EXAMPLE, A FOCUS GROUP TYPE CODE SESSION) Note-taking (NT) (NT)1.FGP_W_35-45_R Audio (AU) (AU)1.FGP_W_35-45_R Photography (PH) (PH)1.FGP_W_35-45_R Video (VI) (VI)1.FGP_W_35-45_R STEP 9. Conducting debriefing sessions Debriefing sessions are a key part of the qualitative research process. Led by the field coordinator, debriefs are held after the completion of each data collection exercise, and ideally on a daily basis. All notetakers, moderators, and data managers (if applicable), should take part, regardless of whether they participated directly in a particular activity or not. This allows the entire team to share experiences and important insights from the field. Debrief sessions are vital for maintaining consistency and rigor throughout the data collection process, yielding valuable insights and fostering continuous learning for the entire data collection team. To encourage open communication, debrief sessions should foster a relaxed atmosphere, but should also maintain a level of formality to underscore their importance to the research process. As outlined in Table 6, debrief sessions serve three main purposes: they clarify the information gathered, they identify missing information, concerns or problem areas that the field coordinator may need to address; and they provide constructive feedback to field teams that can be incorporated into subsequent data collection activities. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 67 TABLE 6: DEBRIEF OBJECTIVES FOR FIELD TEAMS. TO CLARIFY INFORMATION TO IDENTIFY MISSING TO PROVIDE CONSTRUCTIVE OBJECTIVE 1 OBJECTIVE 2 OBJECTIVE 3 INFORMATION OR PROBLEM FEEDBACK AREAS » Discuss any issues » Reflect on any information that » Provide a forum for the team encountered during the data may be missing and add it as to engage in discussion and collection process. needed. brainstorming. » Note information supporting » Identify any contextual details, » Create a space for the or contradicting findings from such as cultural norms that moderator and notetaker other data collected within the may need further investigation to exchange constructive same study. to facilitate effective data feedback. collection. » Discuss any new or » Allow the field coordinator to unexpected information » Discuss any issues related to offer constructive feedback to and consider its potential participants or external factors the field team. implications for future work. that emerged during data collection. » Record any additional insights that arise during the debriefing » Communicate any participant session, including observations concerns or issues requiring of non-verbal cues. follow-up action to the field coordinator To help identify potential improvements in fieldwork and recognize key patterns, debriefing sessions should be structured around specific themes, such as process findings, outcomes, or emerging elements. A clear structure ensures that comments from each session are easily comparable, and creates a solid foundation upon which subsequent debriefs can build. The primary input to a debriefing session is the set of notes generated and organized within the context of each research activity by the notetaker. This is ideally complemented by a research wall, i.e. analog or digital boards designed to capture key insights and concepts from each session. The field coordinator can use a research wall for preliminary categorization to better inform the team’s decisions and make sure that fieldwork remains focused and efficient. Research walls should be accessible to all team members and updated after every debrief to reflect progress accurately. To enrich discussion and analysis, inputs should also include visual aids, such as graphics or conceptual maps. Tool 7 provides guidance on how to build a research wall. Comments shared during debriefs should be documented promptly in a well-structured form immediately or soon after the session. This practice ensures that insights are systematically recorded, facilitating both thorough analysis and ease of reference. When recording the progress of each session, activity ID codes should be used diligently and consistently. If individual records are created for each session in addition to those on the cumulative research wall, they should include a unique identifier code and a cross-reference to the activities discussed. This consistency supports traceability and enhances the accuracy of data analysis. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 68 Tool 7: Research Wall 37 1. Define a space for the research wall, be it physical or digital as areas for particular dimensions of the research. For example, in follows: the results section, consider a space for preliminary findings on G2P recipients’ motivations behind using digital payments. a. Physical Space: Ensure a large, cleared wall is available for Ensure that space is available for any newly emerging use, to which various types of paper materials can be affixed. information. The chosen location should comfortably accommodate debriefing sessions for all relevant team members and 5. Facilitate and guide debrief sessions with meaningful wall remain accessible throughout the research period. Verify that engagement. The session leader should direct discussions to the room is equipped with the necessary supplies, including incorporate on the research wall any materials generated during paper, sticky notes, pens, and research data. the research and documented in notes. Team members can post materials and organize them meaningfully for analysis, such as b. Digital Space: If opting for a digital research wall, select a user segments, interview contexts, joint issues, or steps in a platform that supports collaborative digital canvases or journey map. Name these various groups, identify connections whiteboards, enabling synchronous, online engagement. The among them (and with individual items), and iteratively cluster platform should accommodate the use of sticky notes, and link information based on different thematic groupings. images, text, lines, shapes, and other essential tools. 6. Integrate diverse data formats. This can be done by linking 2. Prepare the necessary information for use. Print key quotes, concepts, photographs and so on. Create concept maps photographs, transcribe selected quotes, and convert audio or or other diagrams to facilitate initial data analysis. Repeat the video recordings into quotations or screenshots. Display relevant clustering and linking process using various thematic lenses as artifacts and any additional data for ease of reference. needed. 3. Designate a section on the research wall for tracking activities. 7. Document the research wall. Capture photographs of the A portion of the wall should list all activities included in the research wall and draft a summary of key findings. These analysis, so that no relevant information is excluded. Ideally, this materials can also be provided to different groups to verify section should be updated at each debrief session using consistency and triangulate findings among researchers. consistent identification codes for activities, notes, and other records. 8. Incorporate new data in subsequent sessions. During follow-up sessions, introduce new information, adapting or expanding the 4. Divide the research wall into sections that represent different existing frameworks as the research progresses. analytical perspectives, such as a process-oriented view or a results-oriented view. Within each section, designate specific PROCESS RESULTS ACTIVITY TRACKING PERSPECTIVE PERSPECTIVE 35. Stickdorn, Hormess, Lawrence & Schneider, 2018. This Is Service Design Doing: Applying Service Design Thinking in the Real World. www.thisisservicedesigndoing.com/methods/building-a-research-wall UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 69 As the team begins clustering outcomes thematically, and building the research wall, they may begin to recognize emerging connections and patterns. The researchers must engage with the data impartially during this process, allowing patterns and insights to arise organically from the evidence. It is crucial to remain vigilant and avoid any confirmation bias, i.e. the inclination to selectively emphasize evidence supporting pre-existing assumptions, potentially neglecting alternative insights. As discussed earlier in this guide, fieldwork should conclude once theoretical saturation is reached, that is to say when an additional research session yields no new or relevant data to answer the research questions. Although determining the saturation point can be a challenge, an appropriate indicator for concluding fieldwork is when the research team reaches consensus on saturation through debrief sessions, after having conducted the activities outlined in the Research plan and documented findings on the Research wall. Given the iterative nature of qualitative research, if the research team deems the information generated insufficient, or finds that emerging topics require further exploration, they may decide to extend the fieldwork. This could include broadening the sample, adding more sessions or new techniques and/or expanding the scope covered by the research instruments. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 70 Ethical considerations During the implementation phase, when fieldwork is When conducting intercept interviews or direct observations conducted, adhering to rigorous ethical standards ensures the at G2P payment access or distribution points, the research study’s legitimacy while respecting the rights of participants. team should consider specific guidelines and ensure that their presence does not create discomfort or disrupt the regular The informed consent process must go beyond merely routines of the participants concerned. In this context, the obtaining a signature on the required forms. Researchers team should: should ensure that participants are given a good understanding of the study by communicating its purpose » Respect participants’ time and convenience; in a manner that is culturally appropriate and accessible. For » Avoid pressuring individuals to participate; populations with low literacy levels, verbal consent may be » Remain mindful of sensitivities around public interactions; more suitable, provided participants fully comprehend the and study’s objectives and its implications. Researchers should » Ensure that participants can express themselves freely determine in advance whether written or verbal consent aligns without any fear of judgment or repercussion. better with the context of the study and the participants’ specific circumstances. For instance, interviews should not be conducted with participants hurrying to work or engaging in other pressing Participant confidentiality must be safeguarded. The activities. In addition, to respect privacy in public settings, identities and personal data of participants must be intercept interviews are not usually recorded. When protected throughout the research process, from consent conducting intercept interviews with female participants, the and data collection to analysis and reporting. Any breaches research team should be particularly mindful of sensitivities of confidentiality could jeopardize participants’ trust and and follow the guidelines set out in Box 8. potentially expose them to harm. PAYING FOR RESEARCH PARTICIPATION The question of compensating participants for their Additional consent must be obtained for any photographs involvement in research is a contested and nuanced issue. and audio or video recordings taken during fieldwork. These On one hand, compensation recognizes participants’ time types of recordings, and their intended use, must be clearly and effort, ensuring that their contribution is valued. On the explained to participants. The research team must assure other hand, payment raises ethical concerns, particularly participants that recordings will not be repurposed without if it is perceived as coercive—even unintentionally—or if it their explicit permission. Participants may sometimes agree to influences the voluntariness of participation. Additionally, be interviewed but decline to be recorded, and in such cases, compensation may compromise the authenticity of responses, data collection should proceed without documentation. as participants might provide answers they believe align with researchers’ expectations. Cultural factors further complicate If recordings or photographs are intended for public use, this issue, as monetary exchanges or gifts may be considered such as in reports or presentations, researchers must obtain inappropriate or even offensive in certain contexts. separate consent. These procedures safeguard participants’ autonomy and trust, ensuring that no part of their participation is exploited or misused. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 71 In the context of research with G2P payment recipients, these cases risks being misconstrued as a bribe, which where the primary goal is often to improve their experiences could undermine the integrity of the research and damage over time, it may be more appropriate to forgo direct relationships with key actors. Transparency and adherence compensation. Instead, emphasizing the long term benefits of to ethical standards are essential to navigating these the study can reinforce the voluntary nature of participation. complexities. This approach helps avoid potential ethical pitfalls while fostering trust and cooperation among participants. Ultimately, decisions about compensating participants should be guided by the research context, ethical principles, and For key informant interviews, particularly with government cultural considerations, ensuring that the integrity of the study officials or other stakeholders, the implications of and the autonomy of participants are upheld. compensation require even greater caution. Payment in Box 8: Bringing a gender lens to intercept interviews Researchers should follow the guidelines below when conducting intercept interviews with women respondents: » Make sure that the researcher’s gender matches that of the respondent, especially if intending to speak to women in settings that are patriarchal (e.g., to avoid disrupting any social norms or creating discomfort). » Ensure that the researcher is dressed appropriately and does not cause any issues with respect to demeanor or decorum. » If women respondents are wary of speaking to you because of the presence other people in the same space, do not insist on following them or hounding them to collect information. » Since intercept interviews are typically brief, they are seldom recorded (video or audio). This approach also mitigates any sensitivities participants may have to being interviewed in a public location. » If a potential respondent is hurrying to work/heading away from the touch point to attend to other chores, let them leave. » Schedule intercept interviews at a time when women are more likely to speak at their convenience at that particular touch point (because of time, the presence of other persons and other factors). UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase II. Fieldwork and data collection 72 Phase III. Data management and analysis This section provides technical guidelines for Phase III, during which the qualitative data gathered during fieldwork is analyzed. 73 During Phase III, the extensive Phase III information gathered during STEPS & TOOLS the research process is carefully 10. Organizing and storing interpreted and analyzed. By the data synthesizing findings from interviews, focus groups, and 11. Coding the data Tool 8: Coding Book observations, researchers can develop a comprehensive 12. Extracting the insights understanding of the recipient 13. Elaborating user persona experience and the broader Tool 9: User Persona context in which G2P payments are delivered. 14. Developing journey maps Tool 10: Journey Map PHASE OUTCOME A thorough analysis of the research data can provide relevant insights and enables the construction of user personas and journey maps. These outputs are instrumental in identifying recipient needs, preferences, and pain points, and can ultimately help determine which adjustments may be needed in the design, piloting, or implementation of digital G2P payments. 74 STEP 10. Organizing and storing the data The data collected through qualitative methods is typically extensive and varied as it is meant to capture the complexity of recipient experiences and perspectives. Approaching qualitative research with such detail helps ensures that any subsequent analysis is both in-depth and rigorous. Examples of raw data about G2P payments are listed below: » Photographs (where permission has been granted) » Audio recordings (where permission has been granted) » Video recordings (where permission has been granted) » Notetaker accounts from discussions or observations (often initially recorded by hand on specialized forms) » Written observations by the notetaker from each fieldwork activity » Expanded field notes compiled after each data collection session » Notes from debriefing sessions » Records and notes from the team research wall For accurate and efficient data analysis, all collected data must be meticulously organized and stored after each collection session36. The process of organizing and storing data involves five key steps as illustrated in Figure 2: (i) data collection and compilation, (ii) data review and quality assessment, (iii) transcription and translation, (iv) data storage and management, and (v) monitoring and oversight. 36. Bailur & Esquivel-Korsiak, 2019. Understanding People’s Experiences with Identification: A Guide for Qualitative End-User Research on ID. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/ en/795541561701481546 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 75 FIGURE 2: GENERAL PROCESS OF ORGANIZATION AND STORAGE OF DATA IN QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS. i. ii. DATA COLLECTION AND DATA REVIEW COMPILATION AND QUALITY ASSESSMENT iii. TRANSCRIPTIONS AND TRANSLATIONS iv. DATA STORAGE AND MANAGEMENT v. MONITORING AND OVERSIGHT UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 76 The first step in this post-collection phase is submitting a complete data packet. After each data collection exercise, the facilitator and notetaker should compile all materials from the session into a single, comprehensive data packet. This completed packet is then submitted to the field coordinator, who assumes responsibility for the following tasks: a. REVIEWING EXPANDED FIELD NOTES The field coordinator should carefully review the expanded field notes to confirm they are complete and clear. b. ASSESSING RECORDING QUALITY Field coordinators should listen to any audio or video files to verify recording quality. If recordings are difficult to hear or contain significant echo, the supervisor should inform the research team and discuss potential strategies for improving recording quality in future sessions. c. VERIFYING FILE COMPATIBILITY The field coordinator must ensure that all audio, video, and photograph files are in formats compatible with the operating systems of the project’s designated computers. SAVING THE DATA CENTRALLY d. All reviewed and expanded field note forms, along with photographs, audio recordings and/or video recordings, should be saved in a central data management system. The field coordinator should use the designated file naming conventions to support efficient retrieval and analysis. The data generated during the qualitative research process primarily takes the form of text, often referred to as a transcript. Each interview or observational session (such as service safaris) generates a distinct transcript, which serves as a written record of the audio recording (if collected) or the guided data captured from the observational guidelines applied during that session. These transcripts are often supplemented with information from field notes and debrief notes, providing a comprehensive, objective account of respondents’ experiencies. Additionally, transcripts may include contextual notes from the notetaker, which must be distinguishable from participant explicit responses to maintain objectivity. When participants consent to audio recordings, transcripts can be created directly as written versions of the audio files. When time permits, the preferred and more rigorous approach is to transcribe the recording verbatim in the local language before translating, if necessary, into the language used for analysis. To ensure accuracy, selected passages should then be translated back into the local language by an independent translator, verifying that the original meaning is retained. In cases where time or funding constraints prevent this two-step process, the audio may be transcribed directly into the analysis language. However, the transcription must still be verbatim, and the transcriber/translator must be trained to identify and preserve any idioms or expressions from the local language that might otherwise lose their meaning or nuance in translation. The team member responsible for transcribing or translating should be fluent in the local language and the language into which the transcript will be translated. They should translate everything in the transcript, including all non-verbal comments. Both transcription and translation follow specific research protocols—just as data entry would in a quantitative study— so that all transcripts and translated transcripts are created using a standardized, replicable process. Transcription, especially of audio recordings, can be a labor-intensive and time- consuming process requiring patience and meticulous attention to detail, as well as adherence to standards that ensure replicability. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 77 The processes of transcription and translation must be standardized to prevent individual transcribers and translators from consciously or subconsciously making decisions about which elements to include or exclude. By adhering to uniform protocols, researchers can safeguard the integrity of the information provided by participants, ensuring that it retains its quality for subsequent analysis. It should be noted that the field supervisor must be proficient in the local language to oversee the translation process, monitor the quality and accuracy of both transcripts and translations, and ensure that any slang or idiomatic expressions are correctly interpreted. In addition, in order to maintain data integrity, the supervisor should conduct random spot checks of transcript segments against the corresponding audio recordings. Any deviations from established transcription conventions should be documented for the transcribers to address. The supervisor is also responsible for ensuring consistency in formatting and quality across all transcripts and managing any changes in conventions that may arise during the transcription process. A thorough oversight is essential to ensure the efficiency and accuracy of the data organization process and the rigor of the qualitative research. Box 9 below provides guidelines for transcribing audio files and Box 10 for translating local language scripts. Box 9: Guidelines for Transcribing Audio Files » Plan transcription sessions during uninterrupted time blocks, ideally when fieldwork or other deadlines are not pressing. Transcribing one hour of audio often requires multiple hours of work, as certain segments may need to be replayed to accurately capture all details. Spoken language typically moves faster than written language, meaning brief exchanges can yield substantial amounts of text. » Given the intensity of transcription, incorporate regular breaks throughout the day to maintain focus and reduce fatigue. » If possible, aim to complete each transcript in a single session to retain the continuity of the discussion. Participants may revisit topics or shift between them non-linearly, making uninterrupted transcription beneficial for preserving context and coherence. » Use field notes as supplementary references to clarify or verify ambiguous points within the transcript. » Ensure that all transcripts are thoroughly anonymized by excluding personal identifiers. That being said, the ID which refers to the research session, basic geographic and demographic details (e.g., age, gender, marital status) may be retained if they do not compromise participant anonymity. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 78 Box 10: Guidelines for Translating Local Language Transcripts » Before initiating translation, review the entire transcript thoroughly to gain a complete understanding of the discussion and its central themes. » Note that direct, literal translations may not convey the intended meaning accurately. When translating, prioritize the underlying meaning of a participant’s comments rather than adhering strictly to the words used. » Be prepared to consult with other field team members—such as moderators and notetakers involved in the data collection process—to obtain their insights on translating idiomatic expressions or culturally specific references that may be challenging to convey. » Preserve colloquial expressions, slang, sayings, and idioms from the local language by keeping the original local text in italics, with a brief translation in brackets to clarify the meaning. Maintaining such elements in their original form contributes to the cultural richness of the transcript. » Schedule translation (like transcription) during periods when the translator can dedicate continuous time over consecutive days. This allows for immersion in the content and a more nuanced translation. » Ensure that translators check in and out of a centralized management system for each transcript they work on so that field supervisors can track the status and location of all transcripts at any given time. Once the transcriptions have been completed and the video and image files organized according to agreed naming conventions, the data described above must be stored securely and systematically. Researchers must determine the most suitable storage method for their study, weighing the benefits of a centralized data system against those of decentralized data storage mechanisms. Regardless of the chosen system, the team must implement a robust backup strategy to safeguard against data loss. Furthermore, data storage must strictly maintain the confidentiality of participants. This requires alignment with the standards set by national research ethics boards and any applicable data protection laws. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 79 Before initiating the research, the field coordinator, in collaboration with the data manager, must establish a comprehensive data management system for storing all data once it is in digital format. The following actions and decisions are critical in setting up an organized and secure data storage framework. 1. DE-IDENTIFICATION OF DATA All stored data should be stripped of personal identifiers, ensuring that if unauthorized individuals (and even authorized personnel) access the data, they are not able to connect any responses to identifiable participants. 2. ACCESS CONTROL Delineate who has access to specific pieces of data to facilitate analysis while maintaining the confidentiality of participants. This includes defining roles and responsibilities regarding data access and usage. 3. MANAGEMENT OF WRITTEN RECORDS Establish protocols for handling written records after they have been digitized. Determine whether these records will be destroyed and outline who will be responsible for this process and at what point in the study it will occur. 4. TEMPORARY DATA STORAGE If data is to be stored temporarily, specify where, how, and under whose supervision it will be kept. This ensures that even temporarily stored data is managed securely. 5. LONG-TERM DATA CONTROL Identify who will maintain long-term data control, including decisions regarding access and storage. 6. PUBLIC ACCESS TO DE-IDENTIFIED DATA Decide whether de-identified data will be made publicly accessible, considering any ethical implications and the potential impact on participant confidentiality. 7. SIGN-IN AND SIGN-OUT PROTOCOL A system for logging data access should be established to enhance accountability and security. The responsibility for maintaining this protocol should be clearly assigned (ideally to the data manager) to efficiently track who accesses specific data at any given time. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 80 STEP 11. Coding the data Qualitative data analysis is based on the coding of transcribed data. At this stage, it is crucial to connect the data analysis process with the initial stages of research design, operationalization and data collection. It is during this phase that the initial research questions transform into key analytical dimensions. As the data becomes more specific, these dimensions can be further divided into various subdimensions or variables. For instance, if the research question focuses on understanding the different uses of G2P payments, this could lead to a specific question in the interview guide addressing the motivations for utilizing G2P payments for a particular activity, such as purchasing food. The responses obtained from this question would then become meaningful input for that analytical dimension. At the same time, emerging content categories generated during debriefing sessions (for instance through the use of a research wall) can evolve into specific codes. The coding process involves assigning text segments (words, phrases, sentences, or paragraphs) to specific themes of interest identified by researchers. Furthermore, each segment can be associated with multiple codes, facilitating a nuanced understanding of the data. Coding can be understood as “tagging” specific elements of the text. For example, if direct field observations reveal that female recipients use their waiting time in physical offices to resolve doubts and share experiences through conversations with one another, a new dimension (“activities conducted during waiting periods”) could emerge for further analysis. Depending on the amount of data collected, the objectives and questions of the research plan, data can be manually coded or with the help of software. Manual coding, whereby researchers read transcripts and manually extract meaning and themes from the transcripts, is the simplest but also least versatile method. It is unlikely to be sufficiently rigorous for all but the most minor of studies. Therefore, even though coding with software is time-consuming and requires additional financial resources, it is the primarily method by which qualitative data can be rigorously analyzed. A coding book is a vital tool to ensure a consistent coding approach for analyzing the comprehensive volume of data generated from various research methods. This coding book should be informed by the learnings gained while applying Tool 4 (Operationalization Matrix) and any preliminary insights documented in Tool 7 (Research Wall). The creation of the coding book should be a collaborative team-wide effort. The team must reach consensus on the definitions of each code, ensuring that they are mutually exclusive and exhaustive. This shared understanding is vital for all individuals involved in the coding process, including those using software tools. The coding book should be developed before analyzing the data, providing a clear framework for coding that facilitates rigorous and coherent data analysis. Tool 8 offers specific instructions for the development of a coding book. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 81 Tool 8: Coding Book When creating a coding book for qualitative data analysis, the 6. Involve your research team in reviewing the coding book. Discuss following step-by-step instructions may prove useful: each code to ensure everyone has a shared understanding and agrees on the definitions to be used consistently during this 1. Examine the data collection or operationalization matrix (see phase. Tool 4) that outlines the key concepts, dimensions, and variables related to the research about G2P payments. This matrix will 7. Apply the coding book to a small sample of interview transcripts serve as the foundation for the coding book. to test its effectiveness. Assess whether the codes adequately capture the intended dimensions and themes. Based on this 2. Identify key themes and subthemes that emerged while pilot test, refine the codes and their definitions. Ensure they developing your data collection instruments. These themes accurately reflect the nuances of the data and the dimensions should reflect the different dimensions of recipient or key outlined in the operationalization matrix. informant experiences. 8. Once these revisions are complete, finalize the coding book (see 3. Develop a list of initial codes corresponding to the identified sample research question below). Ensure it is clear and themes and subthemes. Each code should capture a specific accessible for all team members involved in the coding process. aspect of recipient experiences as outlined in the matrix. Keep a record of any changes made to the coding book during 4. To ensure direct alignment with research objectives, clearly the research process to maintain transparency and define each code, linking it to the relevant dimensions and methodological rigor. variables of the operationalization matrix. 5. Structure the codes in the coding book according to the dimensions presented in the operationalization matrix. This will facilitate ease of reference during the coding process. RESEARCH DIMENSIONS/THEMES DEFINITIONS CODES QUESTION Intensity - App What touch points The extent to which recipients utilize various Intensity or frequency of use Intensity - Call Center (for example, digital touchpoints associated with G2P payments. Intensity - Office applications, in-person government offices, call centers, partner merchants, Factors that drive recipients to engage with Motivation - App etc.) were utilized by Motivation for using specific touchpoints, including personal or Motivation - Call Center recipients to access and contextual reasons. Motivation - Office use digital payments efficiently? Adv - App Recipients’ views on the benefits and positive Perception of advantages Adv - Call Center outcomes of using a particular touchpoint. Adv - Office Disadv - App Recipients’ insights into the drawbacks or Perception of disadvantages Disadv - Call Center challenges of using a specific touchpoint. Disadv - Office Avoid - App Factors influencing recipients’ decisions to refrain Reasons for avoiding Avoid - Call Center from using certain touchpoints. Avoid - Office Instances where recipients utilize multiple Combination of different touchpoints simultaneously or in conjunction Comb.tp touchpoints with one another. Any additional thoughts or comments from Other opinions regarding recipients about the use and effectiveness of Other.tp touchpoints various touchpoints. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 82 An important aspect of qualitative research in the context of G2P payments involves identifying differences in the perceptions, experiences, behaviors, and preferences of individuals based on various characteristics such as gender, minority group status, socio-economic status, age, group identities and so on. It is therefore important to identify contextually relevant subgroups and create independent “markers” for each characteristic of interest, with a view to extracting common responses specific to subgroups. The data collection process can elicit differential experiences (such as marginalization or gender discrimination) in the following ways: a. The data collection exercise could be conducted exclusively with individuals possessing a specific characteristic, such as a particular gender, or belonging to a particular marginalized group, such as internally displaced persons. In these cases, the relevant transcript file should be named clearly to indicate this focus. b. In the case of group discussions, some participants may belong to the group of interest, such as a marginalized community, e.g., individuals with disabilities within a group of village women. c. Alternatively, participants may not be part of the targeted group or may lack the relevant characteristics, but still discuss the experiences of that group (e.g., men discussing women’s rights, behaviors or experiences). Table 7 below presents examples of coding strategies designed to elicit experiences of discrimination or marginalization across the contexts mentioned above. While this table refers to gender differentials, the underlying principles can be applied to any specific subgroup. TABLE 7: CODING TO HIGHLIGHT GENDER DIFFERENTIALS AND MARGINALIZATION. OCCURRENCE IN TRANSCRIPTS CODING METHODOLOGY ACROSS DIFFERENT LOCATIONS For focus group discussions (FGD) involving Ensure the transcript name indicates that women within a refugee population the FGD was conducted with this particular discussing access to G2P payments. group. Relevant terms (“women,” “refugee”) should be included in the file name. For a key informant interview (KII) with a Add the code “W” for any references to female agent discussing her experiences women and “Agent” for any text pertaining delivering G2P payments. to the agent. For FGD with women (with school-aged Add “W” for any comments regarding children) discussing their experiences women and “Children” for any remarks accessing payments after receiving them. about their children that affect access. Marginalized groups and possible codes Women (W), Adolescents (Adol), Internally Displaced Persons (IDP), Refugees (Refugee), Low-Caste Individuals (LoCaste), Agents (Agent), Children (Children). UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 83 Once transcripts are coded, qualitative software can be employed to extract specific portions of text associated with a particular code or combination of codes. This software facilitates both the coding and extraction processes. For illustrative purposes, consider a scenario where a researcher wishes to analyze the constraints that respondents identify as influencing women’s access to or use of G2P payments compared to men. In this case, the researcher would extract data coded with “LoAware” and “LoAccess.” The resulting text segments could include statements such as “they have limited awareness” or “they have limited access.” Developing a coding book will streamline the analysis process and identify meaningful and original quotes from participants that serve as compelling evidence to support the study’s findings. STEP 12. Extracting insights To extract insights from qualitative research, researchers can examine data ranging from explicit information to underlying latent meanings that can shape the participant experience37. This process begins with a systematic examination of participants’ responses to uncover recurring patterns, themes, or ideas. Insights often arise from a nuanced understanding of the cultural, social, and environmental factors that influence these experiences. Attention should be paid to contradictions and unexpected responses, as such anomalies can reveal deeper insights that challenge prevailing assumptions. By focusing on these discrepancies, researchers can gain a more comprehensive view of participants’ mindsets, thoughts and behaviors. It is also important to relate the emerging themes back to the original research questions, ensuring that the insights generated provide clarity and a deeper understanding of the issues under investigation. Insights refer to the learnings and knowledge generated through the research and must be firmly grounded in the data collected. Initial insights often emerge from the patterns identified during the data gathering or management process. 37. CGAP, 2018. Insights Engine Blueprint. Building an Insights-Driven Organization. https:// customersguide.cgap.org/sites/default/files/ resource/2018/05/CGAP-Insights-Engine- Blueprint.pdf UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 84 In this context, team collaboration is particularly valuable. Engaging in team discussions helps members refine insights, identify new angles, and consider any aspects that may have been overlooked. Extracting insights is often an iterative endeavor: remaining open to revisiting and reanalyzing the data as new themes emerge will provide a more thorough understanding. Insights and findings should also be validated against existing literature or theoretical frameworks, to strengthen their credibility and ensure that they contribute meaningfully to the broader field of study. Box 11 provides guidelines for researchers on how to formulate insights that will enhance the understanding of the qualitative data and inform future actions or interventions. Box 11: Articulating or Formulating insights When insights are well formulated, it is easier to understand the motivations and latent reasons behind individual behaviors. While these insights are grounded in generated data, they are not merely a recounting of facts or explicit discourse; rather, they require a more profound and reflective interpretation. One effective way to achieve this is for researchers to adopt a critical stance, questioning the available data to uncover why individuals act or express their opinions in specific ways. To articulate insights effectively, researchers must position them within the context of the research objectives, employing a structured approach that includes three key components as outlined below: OBSERVATION » Detail what was explicitly noted in the data, capturing the essence of participants’ responses and behaviors. » Adopt an active and curious mindset. INSIGHT » Reflect on what these observations reveal about participants’ experiences, elucidating the underlying meanings and patterns that emerge from the data. » Analyze the information segmented by relevant sample groups. For instance, a research study might question why there are differences in the perception of bias among G2P recipients living in rural areas compared to those in urban settings. IMPLICATION » Consider how these insights can inform future actions, policies, or designs, and ensure that the findings are understood and translated into practical applications. This structured approach enables researchers to develop clear and actionable insights that inform the design, implementation, or subsequent evaluation of G2P payments for continuous improvement. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 85 STEP 13. Elaborating user persona Depending on the research questions, insights generated may not always fully capture the diverse subjectivities of G2P payment recipients or those involved in the delivery process. In such cases, user personas (i.e. fictional yet realistic representations) can help elucidate these perspectives. User personas create a digestible and memorable narrative, enabling governments and stakeholders to better connect with the individuals whose needs they aim to address. By focusing on specific recipients, researchers can propose adjustments or solutions that accurately reflect the different realities of G2P payment recipients. As such, the relevant differences and variations become essential inputs for future evidence-based decision-making. User personas often reveal that different individuals accessing the same G2P payment delivery process face distinct challenges and adopt varied strategies. This underscores the importance of recognizing diverse experiences to create more effective and inclusive solutions. The accuracy of user personas hinges on grounding them in qualitative research. Engaging the research team with raw data collected during research helps validate the user persona and align the design process with the actual needs of G2P payment recipients. A user persona often includes information about a recipient’s age, gender, and occupation but also their cultural background and socio-economic status. A detailed portrayal will promote empathy, increase awareness of target recipients, prioritize product or account features, and inform policy decisions. A well-crafted persona extends beyond primary demographic data, to cover the motivations and attitudes of recipients, as well as their specific needs, concerns, and goals with respect to G2P payments. The process of creating mutually exclusive groups involves identifying characteristics that define how recipients interact or are expected to interact with G2P payments, such as: UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 86 a. ATTITUDINAL AND COGNITIVE DETAILS Insights into the recipient’s perceptions of G2P payments, pain points, and emotional responses related to accessing these payments. b. GOALS AND MOTIVATIONS Reasons for engaging with G2P payments, such as financial stability or access to essential services. c. BEHAVIORAL PATTERNS Typical actions and preferences when interacting with G2P payments, including, for instance, preferred communication methods and frequency of use. It is important to note that while user personas are useful for gaining an in-depth understanding of different recipient segments, qualitative research cannot precisely quantify the proportion each segment represents within the broader population, given that the characterization of the personas is not based on socio-demographic attributes observable in administrative data. Rather, qualitative data analysis facilitates the identification of the most common profiles among G2P payment recipients. If the aim is to gain information on the number of individuals classified within each user profile, a quantitative research approach would be required. This would entail conducting representative surveys that explore the attitudes, motivations, and behaviors identified in the qualitative analysis, followed by a clustering process to categorize cases effectively. Tool 9 provides a step-by-step guide for creating user personas and Box 12 discusses the importance of a reflective and critical approach. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 87 Tool 9: User Persona To create user personas, follow the steps outlined below: 1. Identify the type of user to be profiled, whether they are G2P payment recipients, administrative staff, or others. Generally, qualitative research focuses on recipients, but this tool can also be applied to those involved in the G2P payment delivery process if the research considers them key actors. 2. Based on the insights generated, identify the main needs or expectations of the chosen user type. Incorporate findings from interviews, focus group discussions, and observational studies to enrich your understanding of recipient behavior and motivations. REPRESENTATIVE PHRASE OR QUOTE: 3. Identify at least two variables to characterize and differentiate the profiles. Examples of such variables include interaction with touchpoints, level of accessibility, and satisfaction, among others. Ensure that these variables are relevant to the context of G2P payments and can effectively highlight variations in recipient experiences. 4. Agree on the number of identified profiles, ideally between three and five. Striking a balance in the number of profiles helps maintain focus and manageability, ensuring that each profile is distinct and actionable. HOW ARE THE MAIN CHARACTERIZATION VARIABLES EXPRESSED IN THIS PROFILE? 5. Complete a descriptive profile sheet for each identified recipient profile, detailing each section by describing what the recipient thinks, does, and feels about the G2P Variable name: payment. To provide a comprehensive perspective, include additional elements such as user goals, challenges, and potential pain points. LOW HIGH 6. Create a phrase or quote that encapsulates the relationship of the user profile with the G2P payment. This should be formulated to reflect the recipient’s voice and Variable name: highlight a critical insight or sentiment. 7. Rate each recipient profile according to the LOW HIGH differentiation variables selected as in the following figure. Indicate this rate by positioning a marker on a horizontal bar, assigning a distance relative to the left and right sides. This visual representation aids in the Variable name: comparison and segmentation of recipient personas. 8. Verify that the constructed profiles are comparable and LOW HIGH ideally possess mutually exclusive characteristics. This step helps maintain clarity, prevents overlap between personas, and promotes targeted strategies and interventions. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 88 TOOL 9: USER PERSONA WHAT DO THEY DO WHEN INTERACTING WITH WHAT ARE THEIR PRIMARY NEEDS REGARDING G2P PAYMENTS? G2P PAYMENTS? WHAT ARE THEIR MAIN PAIN POINTS REGARDING G2P PAYMENT SERVICE? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 89 Box 12: The Importance of a Reflective and Critical Approach to User Personas 38 User personas have been widely used in user-centric research and design. While personas can be beneficial for gaining a deeper understanding of users, it is essential to recognize that they are not a panacea and do come with their own set of drawbacks and risks. One such threat is the danger of reinforcing stereotypes. If personas are based on superficial generalizations rather than a deep understanding of users’ needs and motivations, they risk perpetuating preconceived ideas about specific groups. This can result in designs that exclude certain users, or worse yet, amplify existing discrimination. To mitigate these potential harms, a reflective and critical approach to using personas should be adopted. Key elements of such approach include: » Grounding personas in robust empirical data The creation of personas should not be an exercise in imagination but rather a rigorous process involving collecting and analyzing real user data, e.g., through interviews, ethnographic observation, focus group discussions, and so on. » Avoiding excessive simplification Users are complex individuals with various needs, motivations, backgrounds and experiences. Personas should reflect this level of complexity and avoid generalizations that could distort the researchers’ perspective. » Being aware of the dimensions of warmth and competence Human perception is influenced by how others are perceived in terms of warmth (friendliness, trustworthiness) and competence (ability, intelligence). It is important to be mindful of how these dimensions are represented in personas, as they can contribute to the creation and reinforcement of stereotypes. » Promoting inclusion and diversity Personas should represent the diversity of the user population and avoid reinforcing existing social norms. 38. Marsden & Haag, 2016. Stereotypes and Politics: Reflections on Personas. www.researchgate.net/publication/292970928_ Stereotypes_and_Politics_Reflections_on_Personas?enrichId=rgreq- 489779bc19984d0bad54f6ada83cdd40-XXX&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYW dlOzI5Mjk3MDkyODtBUzo1Nzg5MzUwMTc0OTI0ODBAMTUxNTA0MDI3Mjk5 OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_3 UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 90 STEP 14. Developing journey maps ​​ journey map, typically generated for each user persona, is a detailed visual representation of a A recipient’s experience, including their actions, thoughts, and emotions as they navigate different moments of the G2P payment delivery process. This essential analytical tool confers several benefits to G2P payment research. Firstly, journey maps facilitate the design of recipient-centric improvements by identifying more precisely procedural inefficiencies and negative experiences at various points. Secondly, they enhance operational efficiency. The detailed documentation in a journey map about each moment of the recipient’s journey (and its key pain points) enables policymakers to prioritize strategic process enhancements. Finally, journey maps can help define standardized protocols for consistent payment delivery across different scenarios and recipient groups. In general, journey maps can provide a nuanced understanding of the service landscape and help develop targeted recommendations to optimize policy outcomes and service delivery. They are particularly useful for research that seeks to understand how the design and delivery of G2P payments can contribute to long-term development outcomes. To construct a robust journey map, engaging with a diverse array of recipients is critical. Employing methodologies such as in-depth interviews, focus group discussions, service safaris, and direct observations can illuminate key events, transactions, and auxiliary services that shape the recipient’s journey as follows: » User interactions with the G2P payment delivery process Analyzing recipients’ interactions yields valuable insights into satisfaction levels and highlights pivotal moments that affect the overall service experience. » Process functionality and dysfunctionality The journey map can depict effective processes alongside those that are inefficient or problematic, thereby identifying areas for improvement. » Systemic interdependencies and challenges Mapping enables the recognition of interactions among various departments, intermediaries, and related services that collectively influence recipient experiences. » Pain points and critical obstacles Mapping also helps uncover specific stages where recipients encounter significant delays or challenges39. Further, during focus group discussions or interviews, recipients themselves can be encouraged to actively participate in mapping their own experiences. This type of engagement can capture recipient perspectives and challenges firsthand and document critical touchpoints (see Box 13). A participatory approach is particularly effective for revealing subtle issues and complex barriers that structured research methods may overlook. 39. Adapted from: User research community. Gov.UK. https://gcs.civilservice.gov.uk/guidance/ marketing/delivering-government-campaigns/ customer-journey-mapping/ UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 91 Box 13: Key Concepts for Journey Mapping in G2P Payments A touchpoint represents any instance where a recipient interacts with G2P payments. These interactions can be categorized as follows: » Communication (in-person conversations, website interactions, advertisements, SMS, phone calls, and other communication channels); » Human contact (interactions with service providers, government employees, program staff, and frontline staff at financial service provider partners); and » Physical interactions (activities such as cashing out at agent locations or visiting bank branches, ATMs, or other cash-out points). Each touchpoint leads to a series of voting points. A voting point is a moment during which recipients pause to assess their experience—determining whether they feel satisfied, dissatisfied, or neutral. At this stage, recipients decide whether to continue their engagement, adjust their usage, or, in extreme cases, withdraw entirely. Although recipients of G2P payments often face constraints that limit their ability to opt-out fully, documenting voting points can help understand how to minimize negative experiences and enhance program satisfaction. Finally, each interaction might be associated with a valence mapping40. Valence mapping allows journey maps to capture the linear timeline of interactions and the emotional highs and lows at each touchpoint. By visualizing these emotional fluctuations, researchers gain deeper insights into user satisfaction and engagement throughout the service journey. All recipient journeys contain distinct moments. Each phase incorporates various touchpoints, voting points, and associated emotions. Although each user journey will depend on the context and the specific characteristics of the user persona, a G2P payment framework has four main macro moments41 that can be used for developing a journey map, as illustrated in Figure 3. 40. Nielsen & Bruselius-Jensen, 2021. Young People’s Participation Revisiting Youth and Inequalities in Europe. Bristol University Press. www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/young- peoples-participation/journey-mapping-as- a-method-to-make-sense-of-participation/ ADC98049134EB1CCED013300AE96A9D0 41. The World Bank Sourcebook on the Foundations of Social Protection Delivery Systems provides an example of journey mapping focused on social protection delivery chains, emphasizing operational and administrative processes from the perspective of service providers. For detailed insights, see: Lindert, et al., 2020. Sourcebook on the Foundations of Social Protection Delivery Systems. Washington, DC: World Bank. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 92 ASSESS ENROLL PROVIDE MANAGE Complaints Registration Account Repeat Payment Payment and redressal Awareness and sign-up and access and receipt access (anytime during Enrollment designation usage the journey) » What are the » Where can recipients » Do recipients have an » How is confirmation » What paperwork is » How is the benefit » Are there clear channels used find out more account, or do they of payment needed to access provided? channels of FIGURE 3: MAIN MACRO MOMENTS OF THE G2P PAYMENT JOURNEY. to provide information about need to be signed up provided? payments? » Is it a one-time communication information to the program? Which for one? » Where can recipients » Where do they need provision, or will it be provided if things go recipients? sources do they trust » When signing up for receive their to go? periodic, and if so, wrong at any stage? » How do recipients and see as credible? an account, do they payments? with what frequency? » What is the » How long does this learn about » Are recipients clear have a choice in how process take? » Is there a difference complaints a program, about how they can they can receive the between the first mechanism? » Are there multiple eligibility, and be on-boarded to the benefits? time a recipient » What is the redressal channels through enrollment program? » Can they choose accesses the process? which payments can process? » Do they understand between providers or payment and any be accessed? » Do these exclude the benefits they are between cash and subsequent times? vulnerable groups, » Can a recipient entitled to and the digital payments? » Can a provider like women who switch between options to access » How does the change the payment might have lower these channels? them? process change channel? digital skills? for those who were previously excluded from digital payments? PERIODIC REASSESSM E NT UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT 93 Phase III. Data management and analysis Tool 10: Journey Map 42 To create a journey map, follow the instructions below: USER PERSONA: 1. Define user personas to accurately represent G2P payment recipients, including their specific characteristics, needs, and challenges as they interact with the service (see Tool 9). MOMENTS PRIMARY MOMENT A 2. Outline the primary moments of the journey, such as awareness, enrollment, or accessing payments (see the macro moments in Figure 3). Make sure these stages are kept consistent throughout the research analysis. 3. Document recipient actions at each moment of the Action 1 journey. Position these actions sequentially in the second ________________ row of the mapping tool to create a detailed depiction of RECIPIENT ________________ recipient behavior. ACTIONS ________________ 4. Map touchpoints by cataloging interactions with various components of the G2P payment delivery process, including digital channels (e.g., websites, phone calls, SMS), physical interactions (e.g., visits to service centers or ATMs), and direct human contact (e.g., communication with service personnel). Place these interactions in the third row to illustrate the modalities through which DIGITAL recipients engage with the system. CHANNELS 5. Assess emotional states by noting the emotional responses of recipients at each action, identifying PHYSICAL whether experiences are positive, neutral, or negative. TOUCHPOINTS INTERACTION This analysis will enhance the understanding of user satisfaction and highlights significant stress points. 6. Identify breakpoints by examining the map for DIRECT HUMAN touchpoints where recipients encounter notable CONTACT difficulties or negative experiences. Emphasize these breakpoints to prioritize areas that require further investigation and targeted improvement. 7. Present the information clearly and succinctly to ensure effective communication and dissemination within the organization. A streamlined approach in this regard will lead to a broader understanding of the matter and EMOTIONS facilitate effective practical applications. 8. Evaluate whether additional maps are needed to represent different user personas. Repeat the mapping process if necessary, concentrating on the unique touchpoints and attributes that distinguish each persona. 42. Adapted from: User research community. Gov.UK. www.gov.uk/service- manual/user-research/creating-an-experience-map#when-to-use-experience- mapping UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 94 TOOL 10: JOURNEY MAP PRIMARY MOMENT B PRIMARY MOMENT C Action 2 Action 3 Action N Action N Action N ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ ________________ UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 95 Ethical considerations Confidentiality and secure data handling during the qualitative When specifically handling data and information from data analysis phase is crucial for maintaining participants’ interviews, focus group discussions, and observations, ethical trust and generating valuable insights for designing or standards (for privacy and avoiding misrepresentation) include improving G2P payments. By adhering to strong ethical the following: principles, researchers not only safeguard rights of participants but also enhance the credibility and reliability of the study’s » Anonymized discussions findings. Team discussions about the data should use anonymized information to prevent inadvertent disclosure of participant To protect the identities of participants and prevent the identities. unintended disclosure of sensitive details, researchers must implement rigorous confidentiality measures, including the » Transparent data use following: Researchers must use the collected data strictly for purposes outlined during the informed consent process. » Anonymization of data Any deviation from this principle requires additional Before analysis begins, all data should be anonymized participant consent and Ethics Review Board approval. by removing personal identifiers, such as names and addresses. Instead, pseudonyms or numerical codes » Cultural sensitivity should label responses contained in transcripts, notes, and Researchers must consider cultural norms during their documents. analysis to avoid drawing conclusions that misrepresent or stereotype participants. This will ensure that the » Limited access findings are contextually accurate and respectful of each Only authorized research team members should be able to participant’s background. access raw data. Field notes, transcripts, audio, and video recordings must not be shared with individuals outside the research team or those not directly involved in analysis. » Secure storage Physical materials, including notes and transcripts, should be stored in locked containers (for digital data, see the next bullet point). Security and oversight should be provided by field coordinators during and after fieldwork. » Digital security measures Digital files should be password-protected, encrypted and stored on secure devices. Backup copies should be created to prevent data loss but must also adhere to strict security protocols to prevent unauthorized access. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase III. Data management and analysis 96 Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan This section is intended to provide a guide for Phase IV, during which the findings and insights derived from the qualitative research are communicated. 97 The aim of this final phase is Phase IV to methodically document STEPS & TOOLS key insights and findings 15. Compiling a structured from the qualitative research, and comprehensive underscoring those insights report that are most pertinent to 16. Developing a guiding policy decisions related dissemination plan to G2P payments. Recipients’ Tool 11: Dissemination Plan perspectives are integrated into implementing and enhancing the payment delivery process under study, while also providing a potential model to inspire similar initiatives on a global scale. PHASE OUTCOME By implementing the recommendations in this section, the team will produce a clear, relevant, and actionable report of findings accompanied by a jointly defined dissemination plan. 98 STEP 15. Compiling a structured and comprehensive report The findings of qualitative research must be effectively communicated to guide informed decision-making across G2P payment design, pilot, and post-implementation stages. Given the substantial resources invested in qualitative studies, ensuring stakeholders can leverage this information strategically is as critical as the research process itself. The first step of the dissemination phase is to compile a structured, comprehensive, and accessible report that includes the critical insights generated throughout the research. This report will function as the principal reference for subsequent dissemination activities. Policymakers often have limited time to engage with detailed analyses or extensive descriptions. Therefore, the report must present insights in a manner that is both concise and impactful. Its structure should be carefully crafted to maximize readability and facilitate comprehension. Based on the insights identified during the analysis phase, select those most relevant for answering the research questions and addressing the objectives of the study. The team should prioritize three to ten key insights: selecting too few insights risks providing insufficient information, while selecting too many may overwhelm the audience and hinder reflective discussion or policy decision-making. The principal researcher should lead this selection process, supported by data analysts. The next step is to organize these insights strategically, e.g., by research objectives, experience stages, or by recipient profile. Regardless of the approach chosen, the aim is for the report to retain the audience’s attention and provoke meaningful discussions about G2P payment design, piloting or implementation. Insights that are particularly relevant for policymakers and do not require additional context should be presented first. For instance, if the research identified three critical insights about barriers faced by women using G2P payments, the main body could present these as follows: Women are strongly inclined to adopt digital G2P payments because they associate them with enhanced economic autonomy compared to cash. The most critical pain point in recipients’ experiences is the payment collection process, which is mandatory and available only at a single location. This creates significant challenges due to transportation costs and time burdens, particularly for those in rural areas. Payments are delivered through mobile money, requiring recipients to own a phone or at least a SIM card in a context where each household has only one phone, which typically belongs to the male head of household or eldest male household member. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 99 The structure above emphasizes the most relevant insights first, followed by more detailed insights and those that require more context. Selecting the insights Given the richness and diversity of qualitative data, not all findings can or should be included. Prioritizing insights requires careful judgement to ensure that the final report remains focused, actionable, and grounded in evidence. To guide this process, research teams should apply the following criteria: TABLE 8: SELECTING INSIGHTS CRITERIA. ALIGNMENT WITH RESEARCH REPRESENTATIVENESS AND RELEVANCE TO CRITERIA 1 CRITERIA 2 CRITERIA 3 OBJECTIVES ANALYTICAL VALUE PROGRAMMATIC IMPROVEMENTS Insights that directly answer the Prioritize insights that are Select insights that offer concrete research questions or offer critical representative of broader patterns implications for improving G2P context for their interpretation across the dataset or reveal payment design or delivery. should be given top priority. meaningful contrasts between Insights that illuminate why a This ensures that the report population groups. challenge occurs, or how a specific remains strategically relevant Insights that reflect a repeated feature enables or hinders use, are and supports evidence-based theme across locations or especially valuable for informing decision-making. segments (e.g., women in rural solutions. areas) hold greater explanatory power than isolated or anecdotal findings. Organizing insights The structure of a qualitative findings report should be selected based on the main research questions, the intended use of the study (e.g., informing program redesign, evaluating delivery processes), and the context in which G2P payments are implemented. Below are common and effective ways to organize insights: a. Organizing findings by users’ expectations In studies conducted before a G2P payment is rolled out, insights can be organized around the motivations and perceived barriers of potential recipients. This structure is particularly relevant during design and piloting phases, where insights about how different population groups anticipate interacting with the program can help align delivery mechanisms with their expectations and strengthen the likelihood of effective uptake and sustained use. This approach prioritizes the analysis of how individuals interpret the purpose of the program, what they expect to gain from it, and what may prevent them from engaging fully, especially in contexts where digital infrastructure or trust in public services is uneven. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 100 To structure the report, findings can be organized following three key dimensions: » Motivations: This refers to the meanings participants attach to the program and the reasons they would engage with it. Findings may include motivations about addressing immediate needs, enhancing autonomy or accessing to formal financing services. For digital payments specifically, motivations might involve perceptions of safety, privacy, or convenience over cash-based alternatives. Findings should also explore how these motivations differ by life stage, gender, or socio-economic context, and which program features are perceived as enablers of engagement. » Capacities and barriers: This synthesizes findings on practical and cognitive capacities that may influence recipients’ ability to access and use the program as intended. Barriers may be material (e.g., lack of connectivity or ID documents), cognitive (e.g., low digital literacy), or social (e.g., stigma, fear of surveillance, or household power dynamics). Insights in this dimension should also highlight mismatches between program assumptions (e.g., presumed phone ownership) and actual user capabilities. » Opportunities and risks of exclusion: This highlights findings related to bias or unintended exclusion embedded in program design. Findings should assess to what extent eligibility criteria, segmentation strategies, delivery channels, or payment mechanisms account for the lived realities of marginalized groups. They serve not only as diagnostic inputs but also as warnings of potential implementation failure if such dynamics remain unaddressed. When using this framework, it is advisable to structure each dimension clearly, using comparative analysis where variations between user segments are observed. Tools such as user persona (see Tool 9) can help to communicate diverse motivations and anticipated challenges to program designers. The structure can also vary by introducing different types of user personas, for whom motivations, capacities, opportunities, and risks associated with the program are described comparatively. In such cases, insights reveal sharp contrasts between segments and when program adaptations are needed to serve diverse groups equitably. It also helps practitioners move beyond generic categories (e.g., “women” or “rural users”) and instead understand how intersecting factors shape real-world participation. Organizing findings in this way enables research teams to deliver forward-looking evidence that supports design decisions, risk mitigation, and context-sensitive implementation strategies. It helps surface not only whether people will engage, but why they might not—and what can be done to change that. b. Organizing findings by key moments of the user journey When the primary objective of the study is to identify user experience and frictions that affect the delivery of G2P payments, it is recommended to organize findings around the key functional moments of the payment process. Rather than offering a narrative account of events, this approach focuses on identifying where and why user experiences diverge from the intended program design and examining what the implications are for satisfaction and continuity. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 101 The user journey can be analytically broken down into the following core moments, each corresponding to distinct categories of insights: » Enroll: This refers to how users receive information and proceed with account sign-up and payment channel designation. Findings should focus on the clarity, timing, and reliability of communications, as well as confusion, delays, or misinformation that may affect users’ ability to complete this stage successfully. » Payment delivery: This covers the interaction with the payment channel, including time to access funds, associated costs, assistance received, and user strategies for managing and spending the transfer. Findings often reveal operational frictions or behavioral adaptations that diverge from the intended user flow. » Management: This includes findings related to problem resolution. It examines the availability of grievance redressal mechanisms, barriers to accessing support, and recipients’ perceptions of fairness, responsiveness, and institutional accountability. Rather than describing each moment linearly, it is advisable to structure each section around pain points or friction areas identified within that moment. Begin with a brief explanation of the stage’s intended function, then present clustered insights that highlight where and why the user experience diverges from expectations. Where relevant, contrast different user segments (e.g. urban vs. rural, women vs. men) to reveal inequities or implementation gaps. Journey maps created during analysis (see Tool 10) can complement this structure by visualizing the flow of user experience and pinpointing areas of breakdown. In the report, include focused excerpts from these maps, highlighting only the most critical interactions rather than inserting full diagrams, which can overwhelm non-technical readers. Cross-cutting issues (e.g. limited digital access, financial literacy gaps, or institutional mistrust) should be addressed through standalone analytical boxes or thematic sections to preserve interpretive coherence across the report. This type of organization is particularly suitable for studies conducted during pilot phases, program scale-up, or post-implementation reviews, where actionable insights are required. It allows findings to be directly aligned with operational responsibilities and facilitates the translation of qualitative evidence into programmatic improvements. c. Organizing findings by perceived outcomes When the main purpose of a qualitative study is to understand the perceived outcomes of a G2P payment from the perspective of recipients, it is recommended to organize findings according to the program’s expected results—whether these are explicitly defined in its design or theory of change, or emerge inductively through participants’ narratives. This structure is particularly useful for implementation reviews and comparative analyses across different digital payment modalities. It is especially suitable for answering research questions related to subjective well-being, such as overall impact of digital G2P payments on recipients’ well-being, advantages or disadvantages they associate with digital modalities compared to previous cash-based payments methods and in what ways has the payment method has improved (or failed to improve) their autonomy, privacy, financial planning, or ability to meet basic needs. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 102 To structure the findings, research teams can align recipient-reported experiences with the program’s defined objectives, grouping insights under different categories. Examples of such categories—adapted to each program’s goals—include the following: » ​​Financial autonomy: This includes perceptions of increased control over when and how to use funds, reduced misappropriation by intermediaries, and greater ability to plan household finances. Findings may also highlight limitations, such as reduced autonomy when users must rely on others to operate digital tools. » Efficiency: Findings in this area relate to perceived ease of access, time savings, lower transaction costs, among others. These can be contrasted with frustrations such as delayed payments, issues with the account, or cash-out problems that undermine expected gains. » Social inclusion: This captures how recipients perceive changes in their quality of life, sense of security, or ability to participate in community or household decision-making. Recipient narratives often reveal unintended positive or negative ripple effects beyond the core financial objective of the program. Finally, when using this structure, it is essential to maintain a narrative orientation. Each outcome category should be illustrated through recipient voices, showing how and why perceived changes have occurred, and under what conditions. This ensures that findings do not simply assess whether a program “worked,” but how it created (or failed to create) value in recipients’ lived experience. In contexts where the program’s results framework includes explicit goals—such as increased financial inclusion or women’s economic empowerment—findings can be aligned accordingly, while also identifying outcomes that emerge unexpectedly or that differ in meaning for recipients compared to institutional framings. To present this type of structure, the use of conceptual maps or comparative tables or can help synthesize how different recipients interpret program value. Conceptual diagrams can also trace how specific payment design elements (e.g., mobile transfers) contribute to perceived outcomes across different dimensions. Describing insights The report should describe each insight by explaining its relevance, its context and information on how it manifests in the target population. The information provided, through succinct, should still include sufficient details to facilitate comparisons between different population segments or establish meaningful contrasts. For instance, indicating that an insight is specific to a population segment with low digital skills would imply that it is not generalizable to the broader population. Visual elements (such as user personas, journey maps, and other team-elaborated graphics) can significantly enhance the presentation of key findings. These tools aid in translating qualitative data into compelling and digestible formats. Accompanying visual aids with narrative summaries will further illuminate the importance of the findings. With participant consent, including photographs from the research process can make it more engaging and relatable for stakeholders. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 103 The user persona tool can be presented when exploring differences observed between various types of recipients. A journey map could be used to highlight specific interactions or critical points during the recipient experience, particularly those associated with outcomes such as discontinuation of use or decreased satisfaction. As journey maps are detailed graphical tools that can be challenging to interpret at a glance, only the most relevant sections should be included in the main body of the report. The complete journey map can be included in the appendix for additional reference. However, if the intent is to reflect the emotional dynamics of a recipient’s experience at various stages of the payment journey, a more comprehensive version of the journey map can be presented in the main body. In this case, graphics should be concise and limited to strictly relevant and necessary information, as additional details risk diluting the main message. Moreover, graphical illustrations and summaries can significantly enhance a reader’s understanding of the insights presented. These graphical representations can also be adapted for presentations or other formats that require minimal text. Tools such as tables, comparative quadrants, maps, or other graphic resources, are useful and should adhere to the principle of simplicity when presenting information. On the other hand, numerical graphs are not recommended, as their relevance lies in the saturation of qualitative information rather than the number of specific mentions. Each insight must be supported by solid evidence, such as transcribed textual quotes, photographs, or other records that clearly and precisely document the observations made. The selection of the qualitative evidence must be rigorous, prioritizing those elements that most effectively and convincingly support the argument, thereby enhancing the validity and credibility of the findings. Textual quotes and photographs should be incorporated seamlessly throughout the document using a distinctive format that facilitates their identification without disrupting the text flow. Report format should adhere to established academic style guidelines, ensuring a clear, standardized, and consistent presentation that does not distract the reader from the primary analysis. Figure 4 illustrates the four most effective ways in which to present qualitative research findings, namely a) textual descriptions, b) user personas, c) journey maps, and d) team-elaborated graphics. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 104 FIGURE 4: WAYS TO PRESENT QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FINDINGS. INSIGHTS A B USER PERSONA TOOL persona description variable description textual quotes PICTURES TEXTUAL QUOTES TEXT DESCRIPTION C D GRAPHIC RELEVANT RESOURCES SECTION OF THE JOURNEY MAP 105 Synthesizing findings The final section of the report should synthesize the findings related to the original research questions and exploring their broader implications for policies and practices: » Provide actionable recommendations based on the observed results to guide policy discussions. To deepen the analysis, integrate inductively derived insights with references to best practices in G2P payment delivery. » Incorporate lessons learned throughout the research process, highlighting the challenges encountered and offering strategic recommendations for future studies. This will add a layer of depth to the report and position it as a valuable resource for subsequent research. » Address the study’s limitations in the report to provide stakeholders with a clearer understanding of the research context and scope, fostering transparency and supporting well-informed decision-making. Finally, the timeliness of the report’s dissemination is as critical as the report’s quality: the report should be released promptly at the conclusion of the research so that the findings stay relevant and applicable for understanding the experiences, motivations, obstacles, and behaviors of G2P payment recipients. STEP 16. Developing a dissemination plan The next phase involves creating dissemination subproducts designed to broaden the reach and impact of the research insights as presented in the structured research report. These subproducts should reference the main report but can focus on specific aspects of the study (for instance, on the experiences of female participants or other relevant subgroups). The format of these subproducts should be adaptable to meet the varied needs of stakeholders, including presentations, visual content, and concise written summaries. In the creation of dissemination subproducts, it is essential to incorporate graphical elements that summarize information, making them more comprehensible and engaging. The use of infographics, charts, and other visual aids can effectively present complex findings in an accessible format. Subproducts should be concise and strategically focused on conveying key research findings. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 106 To maintain the integrity of the research, all subproducts must accurately reflect the findings as outlined in the main report. However, more straightforward or streamlined messaging may be necessary to make the information more digestible and compelling for a wider audience. This strategy enhances the appeal and effectiveness of the communication outputs. Subproducts should also serve as valuable tools for various engagement activities. For example, structured presentations can provide a foundation for discussions in workshops with policymakers and stakeholders, facilitating dialogue that can lead to a deeper understanding and application of findings about the design and implementation of G2P payment processes. The content, format, and potential activities associated with each subproduct should be tailored to the specific needs and preferences of the stakeholders involved in each step of the G2P payment process. It is crucial to foster dialogue with diverse actors; managing different points of contact and channels for exchange will be vital in amplifying the influence of G2P recipients’ experiences. To this end, involving the original research team in developing these subproducts ensures fidelity to the data and findings while collaborating with experts in scientific communication to support public policy decisions. To effectively achieve dissemination objectives, the team should develop a comprehensive dissemination plan. This plan should identify key stakeholders, specify dissemination goals for each audience, and determine the types of outputs or activities suitable for each group and audience type. Clear responsibilities within the team should be assigned to ensure coordinated execution. Ideally, the plan should also incorporate timelines, channels for dissemination, and any specific metrics or indicators for measuring the reach and impact of each activity. For example, dissemination strategies may include presenting findings in targeted workshops, publishing in policy briefs or academic journals, or using digital media platforms including blog posts to reach a broader audience. Tool 11 provides guidance on how to maximize the influence and impact of findings by tailoring communication to relevant decision-makers and stakeholders. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 107 Tool 11: Dissemination Plan 1. Define the objectives of the dissemination plan by need information on how recipients perceive payment clarifying what you aim to achieve with the G2P research convenience, while financial service providers may need findings. Consider questions such as “do you want to data on operational barriers or their experience with influence policy, increase awareness among stakeholders accessing and using digital payments. and/or guide improvements in the implementation of G2P 4. Select appropriate dissemination formats and channels payment delivery processes”? that fit each audience’s requirements and preferences. 2. Identify the principal stakeholders and target audiences Policy briefs or concise reports may be effective for for the findings. G2P payments may include government government officials, while NGOs or local organizations officials, financial service providers, NGOs, and might engage better through presentations, infographics, communities receiving the payments. Segment each or interactive webinars. Ensure that these formats and audience based on their influence, interests, and roles in channels promote accessibility and encourage the G2P payment implementation process, and consider engagement. the best ways to engage them effectively. 5. Develop metrics to evaluate the impact of your 3. Specify key messages for each group to make your dissemination strategy. Possible metrics include the findings actionable and relevant. Highlight insights that number of stakeholders reached, engagement metrics address challenges, opportunities, or recommendations like downloads or feedback, and any observable influence specific to each audience. For instance, policymakers may on policy, practice, or design principles for G2P payments. DISSEMINATION STAKEHOLDERS FORMATS AND KEY MESSAGES METRICS FOR IMPACT OBJECTIVES AND AUDIENCE CHANNELS Inform the refinement Policymakers: “Recipients report Policy brief sent to » Uptake of of onboarding Lead redesign confusion over SMS- national stakeholders recommendations in and communication and regulatory based instructions with synthesized policy revisions. strategies in a adjustments. and inconsistent insights and digital G2P program onboarding across recommendations. for rural low-income local offices. populations. Standardized protocols and clearer communication are needed.” Support interagency Payment providers and “Recipients Keynote and technical » Participant coordination through telecoms: Oversee experienced roundtable with feedback on evidence sharing with digital systems and authentication providers to discuss roundtable payment infrastructure user authentication. failures due to shared operational frictions usefulness. actors. phones. Design must and technical account for multi-user recommendations. » Evidence of devices.” technical fixes or new features. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 108 Ethical considerations The final phase of research—communicating results— In this context, researchers should follow the guidelines below: demands careful adherence to ethical principles: findings must be shared responsibly while safeguarding the privacy, » Contextual reporting dignity, and trust of G2P payment recipients. Given the Present findings within their appropriate context, personal and socio-economic vulnerabilities often associated acknowledging limitations such as geographic or with G2P payment recipients, communications must be demographic scope. For example, rural recipient managed ethically to ensure the protection of recipients while experiences should not be generalized to urban populations also informing meaningful improvements to G2P systems. without evidence. Similarly, highlight any systemic Confidentiality is particularly critical in the context of G2P challenges unique to specific payment modalities, such as payment research, as participants’ financial and personal mobile money versus direct bank transfers. information could unintentionally become identifiable. » Balanced presentation Researchers must adopt stringent measures to protect the Address both the successes and challenges of the G2P anonymity of participants while sharing actionable insights. payment delivery process. For instance, while a digital Such measures include the following: payment method might have improved financial inclusion for many, it could also have created access issues for » Use of quotes recipients without digital literacy or reliable internet access. When incorporating direct quotes from participants, attribute them generically (e.g., “a participant from a Finally, when sharing results with stakeholders, such as rural area” or “a respondent in their 30s”) and exclude any policymakers, funders, or advocacy groups, findings should information that might reveal their identity. It’s a small help address inequities rather than exacerbate them. The change, but it makes a big difference in keeping identities objective is to inform policies that improve G2P payments private. while respecting the perspectives and dignity of recipients. In » Aggregate data presentation this context, the following guidelines should be followed: Findings should be reported at a group level rather than focusing on individual cases. For instance, instead of » Respectful advocacy highlighting one recipient’s challenges with ATM access, Use the findings to advocate for equitable improvements present a summary of the proportion of recipients that in the G2P payment delivery process. For instance, highlight experienced similar barriers. how simplifying account registration or providing digital » Visual content literacy training could enhance program access without Any photographs, videos, or images of G2P payment portraying recipients as incapable or dependent. recipients must be accompanied by explicit, additional » Prevention of misuse consent for public use. Identifying features, such as faces or Provide clear guidelines for interpreting findings to prevent unique surroundings, should be blurred unless participants stigmatization or discriminatory policies. For example, if consent to full visibility. For example, if using a photo to findings indicate a high prevalence of missed payments depict a payment collection point, ensure individuals are among rural recipients, frame the issue as a systemic barrier unidentifiable unless otherwise approved. (e.g., lack of infrastructure) rather than individual error. » Transparency with stakeholders Data must be accurately represented to foster trust. It is only Clearly communicate any limitations in the research, such through trust that insights about G2P recipient experiences as a strict focus on specific demographics or geographic can lead to meaningful improvements in the delivery of G2P areas, and emphasize that findings reflect the experiences payments. Misrepresentation, exaggeration, or selective of participants rather than universal outcomes. This helps reporting can not only harm recipients but also mislead stakeholders avoid overgeneralization when designing stakeholders, leading to ineffective solutions. interventions. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Phase IV. Findings report and dissemination plan 109 Annexes 110 ANNEX 1. Interview instrument Example of an evaluation interview for an implemented G2P payment program. This structure is designed to comprehensively capture the recipient’s experience and facilitate the development of a detailed recipient journey map. This guide has attempted to be as exhaustive as possible. Research teams are advised to choose the most relevant questions and limit the discussion to 60 minutes. Exceeding this period could result in respondent and researcher fatigue and not yield helpful responses. i. Welcome and introduction Good morning/afternoon. How are you, Mr./Ms. [Insert interviewee’s name]? My name is [Insert interviewer’s name], and I work at [Insert organization name]. Joining us today is [Insert notetaker’s name]. ii. Purpose of the interview The purpose of this interview is to understand your perceptions related to the G2P payment program [Insert specific payment name]. We aim to gather insights to improve the design/implementation of this type of payment from the perspective of recipients like you. ****READ THE INFORMED CONSENT TO THE PARTICIPANT**** ICEBREAKER QUESTIONS: » What is your name? » What do you do for a living? » What are the things you most enjoy doing? » If you had to describe yourself, what would you say? Why? » Tell me in a minute what a typical day looks like for you. iii. Questions guideline STAGE 1: AWARENESS OF THE G2P PAYMENT 1. Let’s start by understanding how you usually get information/news about government payments like cash transfers (Probe for TV, radio, family, friends, market, etc.). 2. How did you first receive information about the [name of G2P payment]? a. Where did you hear about the G2P payment? (Probe for locations like a community center, agent location, financial institution, local school, local health center, TV, radio, social media, etc.). UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 111 b. Who did you hear this from? (Probe for the role of community groups like informal workers associations, local govt. official, SHGs, women’s groups, TV advertisement or radio announcement, social media, etc.). c. What exactly did you hear about the G2P payment? (Probe to understand if objectives, such as investment in nutrition/health of young children from poor and vulnerable families, and the conditions to be met to receive the cash transfer, were made clear to the participant). 3. What did you think when you first heard about the payment? How did you feel about it? 4. Did you understand the criteria for being part of the G2P payment program? If not, what did you do to better understand the criteria? STAGE 2: TARGETING AND REGISTRATION 5. When you realized you were eligible for the G2P payment, what did you do? How did you become involved? 6. Did you need to submit any documents to enroll in the program? (Check for ID documents being mentioned; else probe). a. If yes, what was your experience while submitting these documents? Were there any documents you did not have? (Note: check for any barriers she/he might have faced, lack of documents, difficulty in filling forms, etc.). 7. Did you have all the information you needed when you were registering? 8. Did you speak to anyone else to clarify the information? a. If yes, with whom did you speak? (Probe for information sought from informal sources). 9. Did you need to interact with local authorities, government staff, NGO staff, etc.? (Probe: is the person you were told to speak with different from the person you needed to speak with?). 10. When signing up for the payment, what problems did you experience? a. If you experienced problems, how long did it take to resolve them? How did the problems get resolved? 11. How did you feel at this point? (Hint: You can use emoji icons on a scale to elicit reactions to this question). STAGE 3: ACCOUNT SIGN-UP AND DESIGNATION 12. When and how did you learn about the mechanism through which the payments would be made? 13. Where do you receive the money: in your bank account, a mobile money account, or another option (depending on the specific characteristics of the G2P payment)? 14. Were you able to indicate your preference for how to receive the payments or choose your preferred account? How did you do this? 15. What are the advantages of receiving payments through [mention the various payment delivery methods used in the country context]? 16. What are the disadvantages of receiving payments through [mention the various payment delivery methods used in the country context]? 17. Did you have a bank account or a mobile money account before registering for the program? a. If yes, why did you have this type of account before the G2P payment? b. If no, how was the process of opening that bank or mobile money account? What did you need to open this account? (Probe for the type of identification required, whether traveling to a bank branch was necessary, etc.). UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 112 STAGE 4: PAYMENT RECEIPT 18. How did you find out that the cash transfer payment was completed/ready for withdrawal? How were you informed? (Note the different channels through which the information is received. Probe to identify differences in experiences among various groups: men/women, young/old, urban/rural, etc.). 19. Did you face any challenges in obtaining this information? (If the information was received via a digital device, probe to understand whether digital literacy, phone ownership, shared phone use, internet access, and so on, posed challenges for the recipient). 20. What did you decide to do once the payment was received? (Probe whether the recipient withdrew the full amount, withdrew only a portion while keeping the rest in the account, transferred funds to others, saved the funds to pay for goods at merchants accepting digital payments, or followed any other options permitted by the specific G2P payment). 21. What was the step-by-step process you followed to use the funds provided through the G2P payment. Indicate if any of these steps are more complex than others, and, if applicable, describe the strategies you used to overcome these challenges. 22. If you initially selected a specific payment method (such as a bank branch, ATM, digital money, or another option as applicable), but later wished to change it, would that be possible? How easy or difficult is that process, or how easy or difficult do you think it would be? STAGE 5: ACCESSING PAYMENT 23. I’d like you to think back to the first time you accessed the payment you received. What was required to access the payment? (Probe for documents like identification, payment of a fee, filling out forms, etc.). 24. How did you feel the first time you accessed the funds from the G2P payment? Why? 25. What could have been improved in that initial experience? (Probe whether transportation or public transit was needed, or if there were difficulties in reaching a physical location. Alternatively, if it was a digital payment, probe for challenges the recipient may have faced). 26. Did you encounter any other challenges? (Probe for demand-side challenges: digital financial literacy, skills, fears, difficulty filling out forms, long queues, etc., and supply-side challenges: system failures, errors, PIN issues, agent liquidity, etc.). a. Were these problems resolved? If so, how? If not, what happened? (Probe for repeated visits to withdraw funds due to agent/system issues or the need for assistance from third parties to resolve problems through digital platforms). STAGE 6: REPEATED ACCESS AND USAGE 27. I would now like to talk about the second time you went to receive the cash transfer. 28. Did anything change compared to the first time? If so, can you list what changed? (Probe for differences in the amount received, documents/ID required, process, time taken, new PIN, etc.). 29. Is it easier for you during repeat visits, or is it the same experience as the first time? Why? If it was worse, what could be improved? If it was better, what made it better? 30. How did these changes make you feel? Can you explain why? (Probe for pain points or positive experiences). 31. In the times you have gone to withdraw your benefits, have there been occasions where you faced challenges? What were these challenges? How were they resolved? a. What were your thoughts at that moment? How did this make you feel? b. What could have been done to improve this experience? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 113 GENERAL ISSUES AND FEEDBACK 32. What other financial services do you use? Who provides these services (probe for payments, insurance, loans, savings)? 33. Do you know of other people who received G2P payments? Do you know what their experience was like? Was it similar to yours? If not, what was different? 34. Please share any final thoughts about the payment. It can be about what you think would make it easier to receive, more convenient, how you think the process can be improved, etc. 35. Do you have anything to ask me? (Note: do not commit to anything, but make sure you are able to provide an open and reasonable response to any questions that the respondent might have). iv. Closing We have reached the end of this conversation. Thank you very much for your participation and the sincerity of your responses. Your contribution is greatly appreciated! UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 114 ANNEX 2. Key informant interview instrument Example of a key informant interview for the evaluation of an implemented G2P payment program. The structure is designed to elicit in-depth insights from individuals with expert knowledge of the program’s design, implementation, operations, or governance. It aims to support a comprehensive understanding of institutional arrangements, operational challenges, and policy lessons. The guide is intentionally broad and should be adapted according to the interviewee’s role and area of expertise. Research teams are encouraged to prioritize the most relevant sections and questions, and to keep the conversation within a 60-minute timeframe to avoid fatigue and ensure the quality of responses. i. Welcome and introduction Good morning/afternoon, Mr./Ms. [Insert interviewee’s name]. Thank you for joining us today. My name is [Insert interviewer’s name], and I work with [Insert organization name]. Also present is [Insert notetaker’s name], who will assist in documenting this session. ii. Purpose of the interview This interview aims to gather your professional insights on the [Insert program name] G2P payment initiative. As part of a qualitative research study, we are analysing how institutional arrangements, operational strategies, and program design choices affect recipients’ experiences and the overall effectiveness of digital payments. Your perspective will help surface implementation lessons and inform improvements for future G2P efforts. ****READ THE INFORMED CONSENT TO THE PARTICIPANT**** iii. Questions guideline SECTION 1: INFORMANT PROFILE AND INSTITUTIONAL ROLE 1. Could you describe your current position, and how does it relate to the [Insert program name]? 2. What has been your institution’s specific responsibility in the program (e.g. beneficiary selection, registration, payment delivery, oversight)? 3. How long have you or your team been involved in the [Insert program name]? In what capacity? (e.g., design, pilot, scale-up). 4. What types of decisions or processes are under your direct influence or oversight within the program? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 115 SECTION 2: PROGRAM DESIGN AND POLICY INTENT 5. What specific policy problem(s) was the program intended to address (e.g., poverty, crisis response, inclusion)? (Probe: Was there a documented problem definition process? Did it rely on data, evaluations, political priorities, or stakeholder consultations). 6. Which institutions, government bodies or private agencies participated in the definition of the G2P payment’s goals and scope? Which institutions or stakeholders were involved in defining its objectives and delivery model? 7. Were any trade-offs or tensions identified during the design phase (e.g., between speed and accuracy, inclusion and cost)? How were these resolved? SECTION 3: RECIPIENT TARGETING AND REGISTRATION 8. What criteria or rationale guided the selection of the target population, benefit type, and payment modality? What were the key trade-offs or constraints considered when defining eligibility, benefit amounts, or payment frequency? 9. Were specific groups at higher risk of being excluded during targeting or onboarding (e.g., recipients without ID, rural women, migrants)? How was this addressed? 10. What systems or tools were used to identify eligible recipients (e.g., social registries, administrative records)? What were its main strengths and weaknesses? 11. What was required of individuals to complete registration? Were there recurring difficulties, such as lack of documents or connectivity? SECTION 4: PAYMENT DELIVERY AND TECHNOLOGY CHOICES 12. What payment delivery channel(s) were selected for this program (e.g., bank accounts, mobile wallets, agent networks)? What criteria guided that decision? 13. Who were the implementing partners or service providers in charge of delivering payments? How were they selected? 14. What barriers did recipients face when accessing or using their payments (e.g., failed transactions, long queues, agent unavailability)? 15. What digital infrastructure components were necessary to enable the payment delivery system (e.g., ID verification platforms, payment gateways, beneficiary databases)? 16. How was the core payment technology stack (including platform providers or integration layers) defined or procured? 17. How were these issues monitored and resolved? How were these issues monitored and resolved from an operational standpoint? Were agents or providers held accountable? SECTION 5: INSTITUTIONAL COORDINATION AND GOVERNANCE 18. How would you describe the coordination mechanisms that were established among the different actors during implementation (e.g., ministries, local governments, financial service providers, technology vendors)? 19. Were coordination arrangements formalized through instruments such as interagency agreements, steering committees, or standard operating procedures? 20. What challenges emerged in ensuring alignment and collaboration across institutions with different priorities or mandates? (e.g., overlapping roles, siloed data, or institutional fragmentation). 21. Were there bottlenecks related to information sharing, joint decision-making, or data interoperability? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 116 SECTION 6: MONITORING, LEARNING, AND ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT 22. What systems or tools were used to track the delivery of G2P payments (e.g., transaction monitoring dashboards, error logs, agent reports)? 23. During implementation, what were the most frequent operational issues reported in the payment process (e.g., failed transactions, delayed disbursements, authentication problems)? 24. Were there defined institutional protocols for responding to these issues? Who was responsible for resolution? 25. Was recipient feedback, such as complaints, call center records, or satisfaction surveys, routinely collected as part of the monitoring process? 26. What mechanisms or capabilities are still missing to make the program more adaptive and responsive to challenges? SECTION 7: LESSONS LEARNED AND STRATEGIC REFLECTIONS 27. What design or implementation decisions do you believe had the greatest impact (positive or negative) on the recipient experience? 28. What institutional or technical capacities proved essential for resolving operational barriers during rollout? 29. Were there missed opportunities to simplify processes or reduce the burden on recipients (e.g., by streamlining registration steps, improving communication, or minimizing the number of in-person visits required)? 30. What recommendations would you give to other governments or implementers seeking to design recipient-centered G2P payment programs? iv. Closing We have reached the end of this conversation. Thank you very much for your participation and the sincerity of your responses. Your contribution is greatly appreciated! UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 117 ANNEX 3. Focus group discussion instrument Example of an evaluation focus group for an implemented G2P payment program that involved automatic digital transfers through a pre-existing bank account. This structure is designed to comprehensively capture the recipient experiences and facilitate the development of a user profile. This guide has attempted to be as exhaustive as possible. Research teams are advised to choose the most relevant questions and limit the discussion to 60 minutes. Exceeding this period could result in respondent and researcher fatigue and not yield helpful responses. i. Welcome Hello, my name is [Insert facilitator’s name]. Thank you very much for participating in this discussion group. This activity is part of a project involving various institutions and aims to understand the perceptions of G2P payment recipients. Today, we would like to gain a better understanding of your opinions and perceptions regarding the payment program. The learnings from this session will go towards improving the design of the project. The information we gather will be voluntary and anonymous; no benefits of any kind will be provided. There are no right or wrong answers; we are simply interested in your honest views. To ensure these conditions, we invite you to sign the informed consent form before we begin this conversation. ****READ THE INFORMED CONSENT TO PARTICIPANTS**** ii. Introduction To start, we’d like to ask each of you to introduce yourselves. Who would like to go first? [Ensure each participant responds to the following questions unless they feel uncomfortable. Also, provide name tags for visibility]: » What are your names? » What are your ages? » Which community do you live in? » Who makes up your household? iii. Development Now, we’ll move on to some general questions about the G2P payment benefit. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 118 OVERVIEW OF THE OVERALL EXPERIENCE WITH THE BENEFIT THROUGH DIFFERENT TOUCHPOINTS 1. Could you briefly describe, in your own words, what the G2P Payment is? (Probe initially to see if participants understood the benefit and whether their initial use was frustrating, difficult or easy). 2. Overall, what did you think about how the G2P Payment was implemented? What were your impressions? (Consider that it was used through a bank account.). 3. What was the process of learning to use the G2P payment like? Did you find it interesting to learn, and why? What was the easiest part to understand? What was the most difficult? 4. Do you think the availability of the G2P digitally has changed your use of cash? If so, how? 5. Could you share your first experience of using the payment? Did that experience change as you used digital payments more frequently? If so, how did it change? 6. What did you think about outreach and communication regarding the program? 7. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current G2P payment method compared to the previous payment method? (Probe for differences in perceptions about the format). 8. Did you need to contact any public institution or a bank to use the benefit? If so, how did you do it? (Probe for potential issues, such as contact with public offices or bank branches). 9. Regarding complaints, inquiries, or requests associated with G2P payments, what was that process like? Did you have to go in person? 10. (If there is a website or communication via digital channels) What were your initial impressions of the bank’s G2P payment app or website? Was it easy or difficult to use/navigate? What did you think about the features of the G2P payments? USAGE OF G2P PAYMENT AND SHOPPING HABITS 11. Regarding the usefulness of the benefit, how useful was the G2P payment for you and your household? Why? 12. Regarding the bank’s mobile app, how was your experience using it? Did you need help from a family member or acquaintance to use it? 13. How would you rate the use of the mobile app? What are its advantages and disadvantages? 14. Regarding the purchases you made during the month, what did you typically buy with the G2P payment, and where? 15. In terms of your usual shopping locations, how do you think store owners received the G2P payment when you used it? 16. How did your household organize itself to make purchases and use the benefit? Was there any need to plan differently than normal? PERCEPTION OF BENEFITS 17. In your opinion, was the G2P payment was beneficial for your household? Why? 18. What did you think about the amount provided? Was it helpful for your family budget? 19. Was the digital modality and use of a bank card appropriate? What changes would you make? 20. What recommendations would you give to improve the overall experience and expand the use of this type of benefit? Why? iv. Closing We have reached the end of this conversation. Thank you all very much for your participation and the sincerity of your responses. Your contribution is greatly appreciated! UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 119 ANNEX 4. Service safari instrument This template provides structured guidance for simulating the in-person registration experience of a potential recipient of a G2P payment program. This is a sample template and should be adapted based on the specific characteristics of the program being evaluated, the institutional context, and the simulated user profile. Field teams are encouraged to define realistic user personas aligned with the program’s eligibility criteria and to conduct the simulation discreetly, without interfering with actual service provision. i. Purpose of the service safari Simulate the experience of an individual visiting a physical office to enroll in a G2P payment program. Document the journey from a user-centered perspective, focusing on critical friction points that impact effective inclusion and timely access to benefits. ii. General information SAFARI CODE [2.SA_PUB.OFF] DATE AND TIME [Insert date] OFFICE LOCATION Address, city, type (municipal service center, state bank, multi-service point, etc.) FACILITATOR [Insert name] TOTAL DURATION OF THE JOURNEY [Insert duration/minutes] SIMULATED PROFILE E.g., rural woman without a bank account, unemployed youth with smartphone. RELEVANT CONTEXTUAL OBSERVATIONS E.g., payment day, high demand, weather, presence of companions, etc. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 120 1. STEP-BY-STEP SIMULATION OF THE JOURNEY USER ACTION OR INTERFACE ACTOR (person ESTIMATED KEY OBSERVATIONS (touchpoints, STEP MOMENT or touchpoint engaged) DURATION barriers, deviations) Security guard, Was signage visible and Arrival at the 1 service location receptionist, entrance understandable? Was guidance staff proactive or passive? Requesting Was the staff familiar with Frontline service 2 information on agent, help desk the program? Was information program enrollment provided clearly? Eligibility Was any reference made to Program desk, data 3 verification entry personnel existing registries (e.g., (simulated step) social registry, ID database)? What channels were used to Paper form, ID scanner, Data collection collect data? Any issues with 4 and documentation digital registration literacy, format, or system interface? Was the assigned payment Payment channel Program staff, method (bank, mobile wallet, 5 explanation financial liaison cash-out point) explained? Was there a choice or flexibility? Completion of Confirmation slip, SMS Was a receipt or proof of enrollment and 6 instructions for notification, verbal registration provided? Were confirmation follow-up steps clear? next steps 2. EVALUATION OF KEY TOUCHPOINTS TOUCHPOINT WAS IT PRESENT? RATING SPECIFIC OBSERVATIONS Was the program clearly Signage and visual cues identified at the entrance related to the G2P program or service points? Was the interaction Staff interaction and user respectful, informative, support and culturally appropriate? Were the materials Availability of informational accessible in plain materials (flyers, posters, language and local language digital screens) formats? Accessibility of service Were facilities accessible space (physical layout, to people with disabilities waiting areas) or elderly users? Was the user informed how and where to receive Explanation of the assigned the payment (e.g., bank payment channel account, mobile wallet, over-the-counter)? Were helplines, websites, Contact points for follow-up or referral mechanisms questions or complaints clearly shared with the user? UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 121 3. EMOTIONS AND PERCEPTIONS OF THE EXPERIENCE DOMINANT EMOTION MOMENT IN THE JOURNEY BRIEF EXPLANATION OBSERVED At the beginning of the service E.g.,anxiety, Was the user welcomed? Was the purpose of encounter confusion, optimism the visit clear from the start? E.g.,frustration, Was the waiting time excessive or During waiting or queuing boredom, calmness stressful? Were there seating available? Did the recipient feel heard, guided or During interaction with staff E.g.,relief, stress, overwhelmed by instructions or or system empowerment terminology? Was there clarity on next steps? Did the At the end of the service E.g. satisfaction, user feel confident they had completed the process doubt, discouragement process successfully? 4. DIAGNOSIS OF BREAKPOINTS BREAKPOINT DESCRIPTION OF THE EVENT IMPACT ON THE USER JOURNEY E.g., The user was told they needed a User felt excluded and left without 1 smartphone to register, with no completing the process alternative process offered. E.g., After waiting 2 hours, the user Increased frustration, risk of dropout due 2 was redirected to another office without to time and transport costs clear justification. 3 5. ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS AND COMMENTS UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 122 ANNEX 5. Informed consent template for recipients Hello. My name is [Insert moderator’s name], a research staff at [Insert organization name]. Our organization was commissioned by the World Bank to conduct research on the [Insert program name] Program in [Insert country name]. Our conversation with you is part of several such conversations we are having across the country, to collect information that will help improve the services and programs being delivered by the government. You have been randomly selected amongst other program beneficiaries like you, to learn more about their experience with receiving payments. The discussion will take no more than 60 minutes. The information you provide will be important to help us improve your experience with the program in the future. There are no right or wrong answers, and it would greatly help us to hear all your points of view. So please do feel free to speak. Participation in this discussion is completely voluntary. All responses shared by you will be kept strictly confidential and will be used to inform a report on the experience of beneficiaries with receiving digital payments. Under no circumstances will we reveal who said what, and we will ensure that any information we include in our report does not identify you as a respondent. You can stop the discussion or ask us about any question that you do not understand at any time. You do not need to answer anything that you are not comfortable sharing. If I ask you any question that you do not want to answer, then just let me know and I will move on to the next question. If you would like to leave the discussion at any time, that is fine, and you are free to do so. With your permission, we would like to audio record our conversation so that we can make sure later that we were able to fully capture our discussion. However, no one outside this room will be told you participated, and we will not mention your name or any other details about you that could be used to identify you and what you said. All personal information collected on this interview, including the audio record of our conversation will be deleted within [Insert number] years. If you have any questions about this research, the discussion or the processing of your personal information, you can contact [name of the World Bank project supervisor], at [Insert mobile number]. Before we start, do you have any questions you want to ask me? Yes ___ No ___ Do you agree to participate in the interview? Yes ___ No ___ (Note: ask every respondent and get consent) If yes, continue to the next question; if no, stop the interview. Do you agree to be recorded? Your identity will remain confidential, and this is for our records only. Yes ___ No ___. If yes, continue to record, else terminate the interview. Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed and recorded. I am going to begin the recording now. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 123 ANNEX 6. Informed consent template for key informant interviews I want to thank you for taking the time to discuss with me today. My name is [Insert moderator’s name] and I am here to carry out a study on behalf of the World Bank, related to the G2P payment program. We are conducting this study to understand better the impact of the social programs in the community and produce recommendations for improving the program. The interview should take less than an hour. The study is conducted independently and is not linked to the government or any private institution. All responses will be kept confidential. This means that your interview responses will only be shared with research team members, and we will ensure that any information we include in our report does not identify you as a respondent.  All personal information collected on this interview will be deleted within [Insert number] years. If you have any questions about this research, the discussion or the processing of your personal data, you can contact [name of the World Bank project supervisor], at [Insert mobile number]. Remember, there are no right or wrong answers, and you don’t have to talk about anything you don’t want to, and you may end the interview at any time. Are there any questions about what I have just explained? Are you willing to participate in this interview? Yes________________ No__________________ Thank you for agreeing to be interviewed and recorded. I am going to begin the recording now. UNDERSTANDING THE EXPERIENCES OF DIGITAL G2P PAYMENT RECIPIENTS: A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TOOLKIT Annexes 124