nextexpertizer®

The appearance of the proprietary nextexpertizer® tool developed by nextpractice has finally put an end to the seemingly unbridgeable gap between quantitative and qualitative methods. Standardized questionnaires might allow for high comparability of results but frequently fail to meet expectations about sufficiently meaningful outcomes. Qualitative interviews may allow for differentiated accounts of complex situations and contexts but leave very little room for the comparability of individual statements. Yet with the nextexpertizer® both similarities and differences are revealed and even unconscious deep structures become transparent.

When respondents to a survey are allowed to use their own words and language, the probability of them connecting to their own unconscious emotional state is significantly higher than it would be if they were responding to predefined answer categories. This is the essential strength of the free-ranging undirected interview.

The sum total of individual decisions is mathematically computed to create a profile of the personal preferences in choice of words of each individual respondent. This makes it possible to compute the similarity of individual people’s profiles in their choice and use of words, and to assign different words to a particular concept of meaning or assign the same word to different concepts (e.g. clever = either cunning or intelligent). This principle of similarity in the use of words – which is based on Wittgenstein‘s theory of language expounded in his Philosophical Investigations – offers a solution to the semantic problem, the deep problem of the ambiguity of language.

The nextexpertizer® interview and analysis tool has been gradually developed and refined by Professor Dr. Peter Kruse and his team over the course of the past 25 years, and is based on the Repertory Grid interview technique developed by G.A. Kelly in the 1950s whereby the person being interviewed classifies a large number of preset elements of comparison according to the constructs (“ways of seeing the world”) in the form of a matrix they themselves have developed.