Menu
Close
.svg)
Yet amid the chaos, I’ve been reminded of something that grounds me. Even with all the responsibilities that come with running this company, I still find myself asking to jump into the moderator's chair whenever I possibly can.
It’s the part of my work that I’m not sure I’ll ever let go of. I love it. It feels natural. And no matter how full my inbox gets, I still look forward to the moment when I can ask the doctor or patient that first question and see where the conversation takes us. It starts: "Tell me about your professional background and your medical practice - and if you can, something interesting and fun about you personally."
Amid all of this, I wanted to take a moment to reflect on what’s been running through my mind as I’ve returned to moderating more frequently; and to compare notes with others who are doing the same. Whether you’re in the moderator’s seat or on the client side listening in, I’m genuinely curious about what crosses your mind as customers open up and share their thinking. Here are a few of the thoughts that have been top of mind for me.
When moderating, one of the things that always weighs on my mind is how to genuinely connect with respondents. Not in a superficial “rapport-building” sense, but in a way that helps them feel understood. In our profession, knowing the treatment area (the disease, the drugs, the trials, etc.) and being able to pronounce all of the technical terminology are table stakes. But I’ve found that understanding the history of a therapeutic category -- the clinical, emotional, and cultural history -- can open doors.
In a category like HIV/AIDS, for example, experienced HCPs have lived through an arc from no treatments, to challenging treatments, to treatments that are effective, convenient and well-tolerated; some features:
When a respondent senses that we as the moderator and audience appreciate where they’ve been, not just where they are, something shifts. They lean in. They share more freely. It’s not about impressing them; it’s about respecting their journey.
Lately, I’ve been thinking more about the “theater” of moderating: how we’re not only asking questions but also crafting an experience. It’s not performative in the sense of entertainment, but there is an orchestration involved. To paraphrase some wisdom, a long-time client of mine once said to me, "At the end of the day, we ideally should be 'info-tainment.' All the way from the first interview to the final report."
We’re speaking to the respondent, yes. But we’re also thinking about the stakeholder listening on the other end -- commercial, insights, analytics -- who needs an interview that’s engaging, revealing, and, frankly, worth watching.
So I’ve been intently studying podcasters like Huberman, Rogan, and Shawn Ryan. Say what you will about their styles, but they understand pacing, curiosity, narrative arcs, and when to push or pull back. They are all great listeners. They transform conversations into something memorable. There’s value in studying their approach -- not necessarily to mimic them, but to thoughtfully adapt pieces of it in a way that feels authentic and respectful to our craft.
There is an ongoing debate about whether moderators should reference what other respondents have said. Purists argue that doing so risks bias. And yes, it does introduce influence. But to dismiss the technique outright ignores something equally valuable: engagement and the respondent feeling like there's two-way dialogue.
Many HCPs appreciate learning how their thinking aligns, or diverges, from peers. It validates their expertise or introduces them to perspectives they hadn’t considered. This mirrors one of the reasons they enjoy early-phase TPP discussions: the opportunity to learn.
The goal, of course, is subtlety. It’s about sharing snippets that spark conversation, not steer it. It’s about inviting reflection rather than prescribing an answer. When done with intention, it fosters rapport and deepens the respondent’s investment in the dialogue.
Few techniques are as useful or as easily criticized as summarizing what you think the respondent means. Some call it “leading the witness.” I call it clarifying the narrative.
When we paraphrase, we demonstrate that we’re listening. More importantly, we allow respondents to hear their own thinking reflected back. By reflecting a thought back, we give participants an opportunity to refine, correct, or deepen their point. Many appreciate it. A few chuckle and say I put their thoughts more clearly than they did. Others use it as a springboard to clarify their true position. Both outcomes help.
In commercial and medical insights, nuance matters. A slightly misstated rationale can lead to misinterpreted barriers or misjudged value drivers. Clarifying ensures accuracy; not just in words, but in intent. I don’t pretend it’s a perfect technique. But done thoughtfully, in my opinion and experience, it signals that we’re listening -- not just hearing.
One thing that has become clearer to me over the years is just how valuable respondent participation and time truly are. Physicians, nurses, and other HCPs are juggling more than ever, and the fact that they’re willing to share even 45-60 minutes with us is something I try not to take for granted. Their participation really is the lifeblood of what we do, and it’s on us to make the experience feel worthwhile -- not just for our clients, but for the respondents themselves.
That means keeping interviews focused and on time, and being transparent and respectful if we need to extend beyond the allotted window. In some cases, that might even mean offering to schedule a follow-up discussion with additional compensation rather than stretching a session beyond what’s fair. Small gestures like that go a long way in demonstrating respect for their schedules and expertise.
At the end of the day, I don’t see this as complicated or lofty. For me, it boils down to three simple principles:
Not because it checks a box or helps with recruitment in the long run, but because these individuals are giving us something of tangible value: their time and their perspective. And the least we can do is make the experience worthy of that generosity.
As we approach year-end with the finish line in sight, I know everyone is tired. I am too. But it also feels like a good moment to pause and reflect on our craft.
I’m genuinely curious about the inner monologue of other moderators today. How do you navigate engagement without leading? How do you respect neutrality while creating energy? Where do you introduce humor? What small techniques help you elevate the conversation?
This isn’t about best practices or prescriptions. It’s about sharing notes as peers who care deeply about doing this work well.
Because in the end, the moderator’s chair isn’t just a job. For some of us, it’s a calling. And even in the busiest of quarters, it’s where we feel most at home.
