Prior Work - Facilitator Question Cards
Print alongside your survey findings summary. Adapt questions to your context - these are starting points, not a script.
- 1.When does work feel unmanageable? What's usually happening at those times?
- 2.Are there things you're asked to do that conflict with each other or with how you think the work should be done?
- 3.Is it clear what success looks like in your role? If not, what's missing?
- 1.To what extent do you feel you can make decisions about how you do your work?
- 2.Are there aspects of your job where you feel you have little say? What are they?
- 3.When you raise concerns or suggestions about how things are done, what happens?
- 1.When you're under pressure or struggling with something, where do you go for help?
- 2.How does your manager respond when you raise a problem? What would 'good support' look like?
- 3.How would you describe the level of support within your immediate team?
- 1.Do you feel that good work is noticed and acknowledged here? Can you give an example?
- 2.When decisions are made that affect your team, do you feel they're made fairly? What makes the difference?
- 3.Are there situations where people feel the rules are applied differently to different people?
priorwork.au · Generated 24 April 2026
Focus groups & contextual inquiry
Survey data tells you what is elevated. Prior Work tells you how it impacts health and wellbeing outcomes. Focus groups tell you why - the conditions, practices, and decisions behind the pattern. Each are necessary for effective action.
Why quantitative data alone isn't enough
Elevated role overload could mean insufficient headcount, poor work allocation, unclear priorities, or a mismatch between the role and the work. Each has a different solution. Structured consultation is how you tell them apart.
It also serves a participatory function: workers consulted in identifying a hazard are more likely to support the actions that follow.
Recruitment and sampling
Who you invite shapes what you hear.
Under 5 loses diversity; over 10 and quieter voices drop out. 6–8 is the sweet spot - enough for conversation, small enough that everyone contributes.
Volunteers might bias results if disengaged or aggrieved. Where possible, randomly sample based on things like role level, team, tenure.
Don't mix hierarchy levels - junior staff are less likely to speak up/out with their manager present. Same or similar team or role levels generally work well together.
No precise formula. Factors: workforce size and geographic spread, whether hazard profile varies across teams, and whether work groups have elected HSRs. A small single-site org may need a handful of sessions; a large or distributed workforce may warrant one per cohort. The practical minimum is enough to hear systematic themes rather than one team's experience.
If you only run one group or attendance is low, acknowledge it in analysis. Focus group findings are qualitative - they describe conditions, not prevalence.
Before you start
Brief participants on the data before the session. People engage more usefully when they know what you found and why you're asking. Prior Work priotises workplace factors within the focus group template generated alongside your report in the previous section
Manual invite coordination is one of the biggest logistical barriers. Most LMS platforms (Cornerstone, SAP SuccessFactors, TalentLMS, Canvas, Moodle) have session booking - timeslots as events, capped at group size, self-registered. Without an LMS, Microsoft Bookings, Calendly, or a form with radio-button timeslots works too.
Confirm what's recorded, how it's attributed (themes only, no individual quotes), and who sees notes. Set this at session start, not just on the invite.
Facilitating and taking meaningful notes together is hard. AI transcription (Teams, Otter.ai, Fireflies) frees you up to focus on the room. Get consent before recording (invite + start), be clear on storage and access, and treat AI summaries as a starting point - they misattribute speakers and miss nuance. Anyone uncomfortable with recording should still be able to attend.
Internal or external facilitator?
A judgement call based on your circumstances:
Practical note: Prior Work is free - resources that would have gone to data analysis can fund a professional facilitator instead. The guide template below serves as the briefing.
Session structure (90 minutes)
Purpose, how notes will be used, confidentiality, no right or wrong answers. Cover what will and won't be shared with management.
Share the 2–3 priority hazards from the data. Invite reactions - 'Does this match what you experience?' not 'Do you agree?'
For each hazard: 'Can you tell us about a time when [hazard] affected your work? What contributed to it?' Probe for specific conditions, not generalisations.
What makes [hazard] better or worse? What's within the team's control? What requires management action? What has been tried before?
If you could change one thing that would make the biggest difference, what would it be? (Open-ended - don't anchor to existing solutions.)
What happens with today's discussion. When participants will hear back. Thank participants. Signpost the next step so people feel the process is moving.
Analysing the findings
After each session, write a brief summary: main themes, specific conditions contributing to each hazard, and any group suggestions. Do it within 48 hours.
Look for convergence (themes across groups) and divergence (hazards specific to particular teams). Convergent themes point to systemic action; divergent themes usually indicate local management practices to address at team level.
Other ways to gather the same information
Focus groups are one method. Some situations call for something different - or a combination.
Facilitation guide template
Formatted facilitation guide: session structure, key questions, note prompts, findings summary. Can also brief an external facilitator on your survey findings and objectives.