POR # 001-13

Spring 2013 Better Jobs (Skills Initiatives) Creative Testing

Qualitative Pretest of Ad Concepts

Prepared for:
Human Resources and Skills Development Canada
nc-por-rop-gd@hrsdc-rhdcc.gc.ca

June 2013

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français sur demande.

Contract date: 2013-04-08
Contract number: G9547-130001-001-CY
Contract amount: $68,863.73 (including HST)

Table of Contents

• Executive Summary
• Sommaire
• Introduction
  • Background
  • Methodology
  • Concept Testing
• Detailed Findings: Focus Groups
  • Reactions to the Concept – Main Messaging
  • Reactions to the Concept – Target Audience
  • Reactions to the Concept – Emotional Reaction
  • Reactions to the Concept – What Stood Out the Most
  • Ad Content Discussion
• Appendices
  • A. Recruitment screener (English and French)
  • B. Discussion guide (English and French)
  • C. Creative Materials Tested

Executive Summary

Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) commissioned Environics Research Group to conduct quali­ta­tive public opinion research to evaluate an advertising concept that was created in support of the Skills Initiatives - Canada Job Grant campaign, to obtain feedback on the grant itself and skills training in Canada in general.

Methodology

A series of eight (8) focus groups were conducted across Canada the week of April 29, 2013. The groups lasted approximately one hour and 15 minutes, and consisted of between 8 and 10 participants (out of 10 people recruited for each group).  The sessions in Calgary, Toronto and Fredericton were conducted in English and the sessions in Trois-Rivières were conducted in French. The eight sessions were distributed by region and age groups as follows:

The participants were recruited using a database of individuals, identified primarily through quantitative surveys, who have agreed to be re-contacted for research purposes. Recruitment involves contacting persons on the list who live in the required geographic regions on a random basis and then screening for eligibility according to the study design.

Statement of Limitations: Qualitative research provides insight into the range of opinions held within a population, rather than the weights of the opinions held, as would be measured in a quantitative study. The results of this type of research should be viewed as indicative rather than projectable.

It should also be recalled when reviewing the results that the group participants did not see a finished television ad as it would be broadcast. Although the video was in near-final format, certain elements of the ad, including the voice over and the video quality, would likely change from what was tested with participants. 

Use of research: HRSDC will use this research to help to determine whether the creative treatment resonates with the target audience and meets the advertising campaign’s objectives and to determine what changes, if any, are needed in the draft-final creative.

The total fee for completing this research is $68,863.73 (including HST).

Political Neutrality Certification:

I hereby certify as a Senior Officer of Environics Research Group that the deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not contain any reference to electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate, or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leader.

Signature:

Derek Leebosh
Vice President, Public Affairs
Environics Research Group
Derek.Leebosh@environics.ca
(416) 969-2817

Concept evaluation:

• By and large participants felt that the message of the ad focused on the government providing a grant to help Canadians in their efforts towards skills development, skills training and skills upgrading.  Based on the ad, participants felt this was a grant aimed at helping Canadians either “get a job,” “get a better job” or “find a job they really like.”  Participants believed this message was effectively communicated in the ad and that it was a message that resonated with them on a number of levels.
• The main message was consistently seen as positive and one that inspired hope.  The terms “hopeful”, “positive” and “optimistic” were frequently used to describe how participants reacted to the ad.  The ad also inspired a bit of skepticism, curiosity and intrigue among some participants.  These participants were eager to find out more about the initiative.
• Participants felt they could easily identify who they thought the ad was directed at.  Most participants felt the ad was generally targeting both unemployed Canadians and Canadians eager to upgrade their skills to work in a better job.  A handful in each session felt the ad was targeting unemployed Canadians exclusively and one or two in each group thought that the ad was targeting employers / business.
• When describing how the ad made them feel, many actually got a feeling of déjà vu – they felt they had seen this ad before or that they had at least seen parts of this ad in other Government of Canada advertising.
• Nearly all participants noticed the value of the grant and many explicitly referenced the “$15,000” as one of the specific elements that stood out the most.

Other insights:

• Given a general description of the concept, participants were asked whether or not they had heard or seen anything about the Canada Job Grant before attending the focus group.  Accurate recall of the Canada Job Grant among participants was quite low.
• Providing participants with information around the grant program tended to reinforce their initial reactions to the ad.  Participants were particularly impressed with the total value of the grant ($15,000).  Participants liked that the training is linked to a potential job-offer from their current or employer-to-be. They also liked that the grant focuses exclusively on jobs that are in demand rather than catering to the desires of the labour force.
• Although many participants admitted that the grant was not directly relevant to them personally, nearly all could think of at least one person for whom the grant would in fact be relevant and they would be very likely to refer them to the program.
• Participants indicated that if they wanted more information about the grant they would either go to the website mentioned in the ad or they would search for it on the Government of Canada website.
• In light of seeing the new ad for the Canada Jobs Grant, most now believe the Government of Canada is on the right track regarding skills training and the job market in Canada.

Sommaire

Ressources humaines et Développement des compétences Canada (RHDCC) a commandé au Groupe de recherche Environics un sondage quali­ta­tif de l’opinion publique pour évaluer un concept publicitaire créé à l’appui de la campagne de Subvention canadienne pour l’emploi – Initiatives de compétences et obtenir des réactions sur la subvention même et la formation en général au Canada.

Méthodologie

Huit (8) groupes de discussion ont été réunis au Canada durant la semaine du 29 avril 2013. Les séances ont duré environ une heure et 15 minutes et comprenaient de 8 à 10 participants (sur 10 recrutés pour chaque groupe).  Les séances de Calgary, Toronto et Fredericton ont été menées en anglais et les séances de Trois-Rivières ont été menées en français. Les huit séances ont été distribuées par région et par groupe d’âges comme suit :

Les participants ont été recrutés à l’aide d’une base de données d’individus, identifiés surtout lors de sondages quantitatifs, qui ont consenti à ce qu’on fasse de nouveau appel à eux dans un but de recherche. Le recrutement implique de joindre au hasard des personnes sur la liste qui vivent dans les régions géographiques désignées et de vérifier leur admissibilité par rapport à l’objet de l’étude.

Déclaration de limites : La recherche qualitative fournit un aperçu de l’éventail d’opinions d’une population plutôt que de leur poids, que mesurerait une étude quantitative. Les résultats de ce type de recherche devraient être perçus comme indicatifs plutôt que projetables.

En considérant les résultats, il faut aussi tenir compte que les participants aux groupes de discussion n’ont pas vu une publicité finie comme celle qui serait diffusée à la télévision. Même si la forme de la vidéo était presque finale, certains éléments de la publicité, dont la voix off et la qualité de la vidéo, allaient probablement changer par rapport à ce qu’ont vu les participants. 

Utilisation de la recherche : RHDCC utilisera cette recherche pour déterminer si le contenu créatif de la publicité touche l’audience cible et répond aux objectifs de la campagne de publicité et voir si des changements sont nécessaires dans la facture finale.

Les coûts de la recherche s’élèvent à 68 863,73 $ (incluant la TPS).

Évaluation du concept :

• Dans l’ensemble, les participants estimaient que le message de la publicité portait sur la subvention du gouvernement pour aider les Canadiens dans leurs efforts de développement, de formation et de mise à niveau de leurs compétences. La publicité a donné aux participants l’impression que la subvention visait à aider les Canadiens soit à « trouver un emploi », « trouver un meilleur emploi » ou « trouver un emploi qu’ils aiment vraiment ». Les participants croyaient que la pub communiquait effectivement ce message et que ce message les touchait à plusieurs niveaux.
• Le message principal a été perçu invariablement comme étant positif et porteur d’espoir.  Les mots « prometteur », « positif » et « optimiste » sont revenus fréquemment pour décrire la réaction des participants à la publicité.  La publicité a aussi inspiré à certains participants un peu de scepticisme, de curiosité et d’étonnement.  Ces participants étaient avides d’en savoir plus sur l’initiative.
• Les participants croyaient pouvoir identifier facilement ceux à qui la publicité est destinée. La plupart des participants estimaient que la publicité ciblait notamment les Canadiens sans emploi et les Canadiens désireux de mettre leurs compétences à niveau pour trouver un meilleur emploi. Quelques participants dans chaque groupe estimaient que la publicité ciblait exclusivement les Canadiens sans emploi et un ou deux membres de chaque groupe croyaient que la publicité ciblait les employeurs / les entreprises.
• Lorsqu’ils décrivaient ce que la publicité leur inspirait, plusieurs ont dit avoir eu un sentiment de déjà vu – ils pensaient avoir déjà vu cette pub ou en avoir vu des parties dans d’autres publicités du Gouvernement du Canada.
• Presque tous les participants ont noté la valeur de la subvention et plusieurs ont fait référence explicitement aux « 15 000 $ » comme l’un des éléments qui ressortaient le plus.

Autres aperçus :

• Après avoir donné aux participants une description générale du concept, on leur a demandé s’ils avaient entendu parler de la Subvention canadienne pour l’emploi ou vu quoi que ce soit à ce sujet avant de participer au groupe de discussion. Ils avaient une idée plutôt vague de la Subvention canadienne pour l’emploi.
• Renseigner les participants sur le programme de subvention avait pour effet de renforcer leurs réactions initiales à la publicité. Les participants ont été particulièrement impressionnés par la valeur de la subvention (15 000 $). Les participants aimaient bien que la formation soit liée à une offre de travail de l’employeur actuel ou futur. Ils aimaient aussi le fait que la subvention porte exclusivement sur des emplois qui sont en demande au lieu de satisfaire aux désirs de la main-d’œuvre.
• Plusieurs des participants ont reconnu que la subvention ne les concernait pas personnellement, mais presque tous pouvaient penser à au moins une personne qui serait concernée et ils allaient fort probablement la diriger vers le programme.
• Les participants ont indiqué que s’ils voulaient plus de renseignements sur la subvention, ils se rendraient sur le site Web mentionné dans la publicité ou les rechercheraient sur le site Web du Gouvernement du Canada.
• À la lumière de la nouvelle publicité pour la Subvention canadienne pour l’emploi, la plupart croient maintenant que le Gouvernement du Canada est sur la bonne voie pour ce qui touche la formation de compétences et le marché de l’emploi au Canada.

Introduction

Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) commissioned Environics Research Group to conduct quali­ta­tive public opinion research to evaluate an advertising concept that was created in support of the Skills Initiatives - Canada Job Grant and to obtain feedback on the grant itself and skills training in Canada in general.

Background

For the past three years, the Government of Canada has aired the Better Jobs ad campaign with the objective of raising awareness among Canadian youth of key government programs and services that could help them obtain the education and skills they need to get better jobs. 

Budget 2013 includes new measures related to skills and training. One of these initiatives is the new Canada Job Grant. Thus, HRSDC is extending and adapting the Better Jobs advertising campaign to launch this spring. A new advertisement will raise awareness of the Canada Job Grant in the context of the department’s overall Skills initiatives.

HRSDC requires public opinion research to determine whether the creative treatment resonates with the target audience and meets the advertising campaign’s objectives and to determine what changes, if any, are needed in the draft-final creative. Pre-testing the creative elements of the communications campaign will be critical to the success of the overall campaign.

Methodology

A series of eight (8) focus groups were conducted across Canada the week of April 29, 2013. The participants in these focus groups were segmented according to age – the first group in each city was with Canadians 18 to 34 years old and the second group was with Canadians 35 to 60 years old. The sessions in Calgary, Toronto and Fredericton were conducted in English and the sessions in Trois-Rivières were conducted in French. The eight sessions were distributed by region and age groups as follows:

The groups lasted approximately one hour and 15 minutes, and consisted of between 8 and 10 participants (out of 10 people recruited for each group).

Environics developed the recruitment screener and provided it to HRSDC for review and edit prior to finalizing. Participants were screened to ensure they were invited to the appropriate session according to their age. Participants were also screened to ensure the groups included a mix of gender, employment status, education and household income, and ethnicity (to the extent possible) and that they would be comfortable voicing their opinions in front of others. Normal focus group exclusions were in place (marketing research, media, and employment in the federal government, and recent related focus group attendance).

All participants were offered a $75 honorarium to encourage participation and thank them for their commit­ment.

All groups were video and audio recorded for use in subsequent analysis by the research team. During the recruitment process and at the session sign-in participants were asked to consent to such recording.

Concept Testing

One television concept was tested in this research (two treatments of the concept were shown, with slight differences in the voice-overs)  The TV ad was shown to participants twice during which time participants were asked to reserve any comments or reactions.  Participants were then asked to complete a hand-out (refer to the Appendix of this report) as an individual exercise.  Once all participants had completed the hand-out, the moderator invited participants to share their thoughts on the ad concept.

Derek Leebosh, Vice President and Rick Nadeau, Senior Associate, moderated all the sessions. All qualitative research work was conducted in accordance with the professional standards established by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA) and applicable PIPEDA legislation.

Detailed Findings: Focus Groups

One of the primary objectives of the research was to obtain feedback on a Skills Initiatives-Canada Job Grant creative.  A 30-second television commercial was presented to participants twice, after which they were asked to individually complete a short, 4-question form.

Reactions to the Concept – Main Messaging

One of the questions on the questionnaire asked participants to summarize what they saw as the main message of the ad.

By and large participants felt that the message of the ad focused on the Government providing a grant to help Canadians in their efforts towards skills development, skills training and skills upgrading.  Based on the ad, participants felt this was a grant aimed at helping Canadians either “get a job,” “get a better job” or “find a job they really like.”

Some participants felt the ad was communicating a very specific message.  For them, the ad was specifically referring to a grant or financial assistance to help Canadians develop skills for specific types of jobs. On the other hand, a number of participants had a much broader view of the message – for them, the ad was about investing in Canadian skills to build a stronger economy, to help Canadians find work or to keep the economy moving.

Participants believed this message was effectively communicated in the ad and that it wasn’t particularly difficult to decipher.  They did not have to work hard to identify the main message.

The main message resonated with participants in a number of ways:

• The broad notion of helping Canadians improve their skills to ultimately make them either more employable or more satisfied in their job was something to which each participant could relate and something they could immediately consider beneficial to their region and to the country at large.  Even if it did not apply to their own situation, most participants could think of at least one friend, co-worker or relative who is either unemployed or who is underemployed who could benefit from the proposed Canada Job Grant.
• Many also supported the idea of having the federal government in particular play an active role in helping Canadians develop skills and find new or better jobs.  A few in each session concluded that it is probably in the government’s best interests to make this type of investment since the benefits in the long run of having a Canadian gainfully employed and paying income taxes far outweigh the short term costs of paying for part of their training.  They also felt that it is better for the fiscal health of the country to have Canadians paying into the employment insurance system rather than receiving from it.
• There was also widespread recognition that skills development, upgrading and training is a growing concern in Canada.  At least one participant in each session noted that there is a lack of skilled workers in certain sectors in Canada today and that this issue will only amplify over the coming years as older workers retire.  This type of comment tended to gain broader support from the rest of the group, as many could relate to something they have either experienced or to something they read or heard in the media.

Reactions to the Concept – Target Audience

Another question in the questionnaire asked participants to identify who they felt the ad was directed at. 

Participants had much more diverse views over who the ad was actually targeting or was aimed at. Most participants felt the ad was generally aimed at both unemployed Canadians and Canadians eager to upgrade their skills to work in a better job. However, a handful in each session felt the ad was targeting unemployed Canadians exclusively and one or two in each group seemed to think that the ad was targeting employers / business. Some also felt that the ad was aimed at younger Canadians (18 to 35 years old) or specifically at people looking to work in “trades” or construction.

Despite the odd uncertainty, by and large participants in each session felt they could easily identify who the ad is targeting.

Reactions to the Concept – Emotional Reaction

Participants were also asked to summarize how the ad made them feel. 

The main message was consistently seen as positive and one that inspired hope.  The terms “hopeful”, “positive” and “optimistic” were frequently used to describe how participants reacted to the ad.  These sentiments were largely associated with the fact that the ad message itself resonated with participants on a number of levels, as outlined earlier in this report.

The ad also inspired a bit of skepticism, curiosity and intrigue among some participants.  These participants were eager to find out more about the initiative. They felt it sounded good but that they would have to find out more about the program and a few would reserve judgement until they see evidence that the program is actually operational and effective. 

Even though many in each group did not feel the grant was directly relevant to their own personal situation, most of these same participants wanted to find out more about the program.  Participants were specifically prompted to explain how they would go about obtaining more information on the grant. 

• While nearly all participants remembered that the ad made mention of a website, almost none of the participants was able to recall verbatim the specific website URL mentioned at the end of the ad. This did not seem to pose any sort of concern however.  Many would in fact search for more information online and all seemed quite confident they would find what they needed by doing a simple Google search.  The keywords they would be most likely to use included: “Grant”, “$15,000”, and “skills training.” 
• One participant would specifically visit Canada.gc.ca.
• A few indicated that if they were genuinely interested in following up, they would simply pay more attention to the ad the next time they saw it and that they would take note of the website URL at the end of the ad.
• Besides doing a web search, other information channels were very rarely mentioned.  One participant said she would visit a Service Canada centre and a few would call 1-800-O-Canada.

When describing how the ad made them feel, some also got a feeling of déjà vu – they felt they had seen this ad before or that they had at least seen parts of this ad in other Government of Canada advertising.  These participants tended to have the following reactions with respect to the ad:

• Having seen similar ads, they immediately associated this ad to the Government of Canada.
• Sensing they had already seen this ad, a few participants were not inclined to believe that they were being communicated new information.  In fact, a few suggested they would likely “tune out” if they were to see this ad on TV simply because it looked so much like the other Government of Canada ads that they have been seeing and that this ad was nothing new.

Reactions to the Concept – What Stood Out the Most

Participants were also asked to identify what they felt stood out the most in the ad.

Most participants believe the ad is informative and that it provides new information.  It was most notably among the participants who expressed a feeling of déjà vu that there was a sense that the ad was not revealing anything new.

The element of the ad that stood out the most was the dollar value of the grant.  Nearly all participants noticed the value of the grant and many explicitly referenced the “$15,000” as one of the elements that they specifically recalled from the ad. 

Besides the value of the grant, other elements of the ad that stood out to participants include: 

• the question of whether the grant was currently available;
• that the government is investing in Canadians;
• that the grant seems to target Canadians who are mature, rather than just targeting students;
• that the grant is specifically for skills training;
• that the grant seems to focus on specific types of industries – more specifically, some noted that all the images of the oil fields and of heavy industry stood out to them which made them wonder if the program was only relevant to people interested in those sectors;
• and, a few felt that the government working in partnership with industry stood out.

Ad Content Discussion

The latter part of each session was used to obtain feedback on the grant itself and skills training in Canada in general.  To make sure that all participants had a consistent understanding of the Canada Job Grant, the moderator read the following text:

“The Canada Job Grant is designed to help the unemployed get a job, and help those underemployed get a better job.

• $5,000 would come from the Federal Government
• $5,000 or more would come from business
• $5,000 would come from the province or territory
• $15,000 or more would go to individuals towards training at an eligible institution.”

Given a general description of the grant, participants were asked whether or not they had heard or seen anything about the Canada Job Grant before attending the focus group.  A few in each group seemed to remember hearing something - some accurately recalling the grant or elements of the grant, others mistakenly thinking of other grants associated with skills training.  In the end, accurate recall of the Canada Job Grant was quite low among focus group participants – and this was to be expected for a program that has not yet been implemented.

Providing participants with this general description of the grant tended to reinforce their initial reactions to the ad – that the proposed grant would be a positive step and would be beneficial for both employees and employers. Given more detail, participants were able to weigh in on specific aspects of the grant.  Elements of the grant that resonated the most with participants included:

• Participants were impressed with the total value of the grant ($15,000).  The dollar value was actually the main hook for some participants and this is what would actually drive them to find out more about the program.  Some also highlighted that this is a substantial amount of money to put towards one individual’s training, and as a result these participants tended to take the initiative seriously and consider the grant quite meaningful.
• Participants liked that the training is linked to a potential job-offer from a current or future employer.  Greater employment certainty was reassuring to participants since few could think of any form of training today that provided equivalent post-training employment.
• Participants liked that the grant focuses exclusively on training for jobs that are currently in demand in Canada.  This seemed to be a novel approach to training funding and participants felt it was an intuitive and efficient way to fill the skills gap that Canada is currently experiencing.  Some noted that the program would be efficient for employers because it would help them get the skilled employees they need while by offsetting some of the costs associated with employee training.  The approach was also seen to be efficient for Canadian workers since they would likely become more aware of what skills were in demand among employers and would be taking training that satisfies a real industry need and would be clearly linked to a potential job opening.

Inevitably, the general nature of the description of the grant prompted many questions from participants, few of which could be readily answered by the moderator simply because many of the mechanics of the grant have not yet been established thus far.  Common questions to which participants would expect to find answers when they visit the grant website included:

• Who actually needs to apply for the grant – is it the employer or the employee?
• What if the training costs more / less than $15,000? 
• Who actually gets the grant, does the money go to the individual or the employer or the educator? There was some confusion in each of the groups as to who actually gets the grant of up to $15,000. Many assumed the money went to the individual looking to upgrade their skills and some thought it went to the employer. There was little understanding from the ad that the grant would actually go to the institution providing the training.
• What kind of commitment does the employee need to give to the employer who is funding the training?
• Conversely, what kind of commitment does the employer give to the employee who is taking the training?  Are Canadians being trained to fill short-term gaps in certain skills or will this help provide long-term employment security to those who take the training?
• Are other funds available to the trainee to support them while they are doing their training?  This was seen as particularly relevant for those who would need to leave a current job to undertake the training.
• Who is providing the training?
• What kinds of jobs would the grant be aimed at training people for?
• When will the grant become available?
• How difficult will it be to qualify for the grant?
• Where is this money coming from?
• Can a Canadian qualify more than once?

Although many participants admitted that the grant was not directly relevant to them personally, nearly all could think of at least one person for whom the grant would in fact be relevant and they would be very likely to refer them to the program.

In light of seeing the new ad for the Skills Initiative - Canada Jobs Grant, most now believe the Government of Canada is on the right track regarding skills training and the job market in Canada.  Many had not seen any positive signs thus far that something was in fact being done and this ad would be the first signal that something concrete was happening.  If anything, before seeing the ad, participants were more likely to believe that the Government of Canada was on no particular track when it came to skills training and the job market in Canada.  Some were actually inclined to believe that the Government was on the wrong track – these participants specifically referenced recent changes the Government was making to employment insurance and they seemed to also recall Government employee layoffs.  The announcement of the Canada Job Grant effectively shifted the opinions of these participants in a more positive way.

Besides the Canada Job Grant, participants did not have many suggestions on what the Government could be doing in the area of skills development that is currently missing.  Some of the input on this topic included:

• Provide other types of support for Canadians in training so they can continue to pay the mortgage, pay bills, etc.
• Better educate/ inform Canadians about the opportunities available for training and of the jobs that are in demand.
• Ideally, participants would like to find work in their immediate region.  However, if this is not an option, then they would like help to offset the costs associated with moving to a different region to take the training and fill the job opening.
• Help eliminate the stigma associated with working in a trade.  Participants felt Government should better sensitize Canadians - especially youth - that working in a skilled trade is a very good, well-remunerated career choice.

Across all the above input, there was a lot of consistency across participants, from one city to another. 

Appendix A – Recruitment screener

Environics Research Group Limited
Focus Groups on Better Jobs (Skills Initiatives) Creatives
Human Resources and Social Development Canada
PN7433

Recruitment for Group Discussion

Respondent Name: ___________________________________________________________

Home #: __________________________________________________________

Business #:_______________________________________________________________

Group #: __________________________________________________________

Recruiter: ________________________________________________________________

10 recruits per session.

Hello, my name is _________ from Environics Research.; we are calling today to invite participants to attend a focus group discussion we are currently conducting on behalf of the Government of Canada.  Your participation in the research is completely voluntary and your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with the government. 

All information collected, used and/or disclosed will be used for research purposes only and administered as per the requirements of the Privacy Act.  The session will last a maximum of 2 hours and you will receive a cash gift as a thank you for attending the session.  May we have your permission to ask you or someone else in your household some further question to see if you/they fit in our study?

• Yes 1 – CONTINUE
• No 2 – THANK AND TERMINATE

Are you or is any member of your household or your immediate family employed in:

• Marketing Research, Public Relations firm, or Advertising agency No Yes
• The Media (Radio, Television, Newspapers, Magazines, etc.) No Yes
• The Government of Canada No Yes

IF YES TO ANY OF THE ABOVE – THANK AND TERMINATE

INDICATE:

• Male 1 50/50 split
• Female 2

We have been asked to speak to participants from all different ages. So that we may do this accurately, may I have your exact age please? _________. WRITE IN

• Under 18 1 TERMINATE
• 18-24 years of age 1 GROUPS 1, 3, 5, 7
• 25-34 years of age 2 GROUPS 1, 3, 5, 7
• 35-44 years of age 3 GROUPS 2, 4, 6, 8
• 45-60 years of age 4 GROUPS 2, 4, 6, 8
• 61 years or more 6 TERMINATE

GROUPS 1, 3, 5, 7 SHOULD BE A 50/50 MIX OF 18-24 YEAR OLDS AND 25 TO 34 YEAR OLDS
GROUPS 2, 4, 6, 8 SHOULD BE A 50/50 MIX OF 35-44 YEAR OLDS AND 45 TO 60 YEAR OLDS

Could you please tell me what is the last level of education that you completed?

• Some High School only 1
• Completed High School 2
• Trade School certificate .3
• Some Post secondary 4 GET MIX
• Completed Post secondary 5
• Graduate degree 6

Are you working (CHECK QUOTAS)?

• Full Time (35 hrs. +) ( ) 4 minimum
• Part Time (under 35 hrs.) ( ) 2 max.
• Homemaker ( ) TERMINATE
• Student ( ) 2 max. GROUPS 1,3,5,7
• Retired ( ) TERMINATE
• Unemployed ( ) 2 max.

What is your current occupation?

__________________________________
Type of Job

_________________________________
Type of Company

IF MARRIED ASK: WHAT IS YOUR SPOUSE'S OCCUPATION?

__________________________________
Type of Job

_________________________________
Type of Company

Which of the following categories best corresponds to the total annual income, before taxes, of all members of your household, for 2012? READ

• 01 - Under $30,000
• 02 - $30,000 to $60,000
• 03 - $60,000 to $80,000 GET A MIX OF INCOMES
• 04 - $80,000 to $100,000
• 05 - $100,000 to $150,000
• 06 - $150,000 and over
• 99 - REFUSE/DK/NA TERMINATE

What is your ethnic background?

IN TORONTO AND CALGARY Recruit at least two per group who are of non-European descent or who are other visible minorities (i.e. Chinese or South Asian, but could include aboriginal people or Afro-Canadians as well).

Participants in group discussions are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts, how comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you...(read list)

• Very comfortable.....1- MIN 5 PER GROUP
• Fairly comfortable...2
• Not very comfortable.3- TERMINATE
• Very uncomfortable...4- TERMINATE

Have you ever attended a focus group or a one-to-one discussion for which you have received a sum of money, here or elsewhere?

• Yes 1 MAXIMUM 5 PER GROUP
• No 2 ---> (SKIP TO Q.13)

IF YES ASK:

When did you last attend one of these discussions?

____________________________________________________
(TERMINATE IF IN THE PAST 6 MONTHS)

How many focus groups or one-to-one discussions have you attended in the past 5 years?

(SPECIFY)

IF MORE THAN 5, TERMINATE.

Sometimes participants are also asked to write out their answers on a questionnaire. Is there any reason why you could not participate? If you need glasses to read, please remember to bring them. (Add hearing impairment.)

• Yes 1 - TERMINATE
• No .2

NOTE: TERMINATE IF RESPONDENT OFFERS ANY REASON SUCH AS SIGHT OR HEARING PROBLEM, A WRITTEN OR VERBAL LANGUAGE PROBLEM, A CONCERN WITH NOT BEING ABLE TO COMMUNICATE EFFECTIVELY.

INTERVIEWER TELL RESPONDENT
PLEASE BRING ALONG SOME FORM OF IDENTIFICATION AS YOU MAY BE ASKED TO SHOW IT.

IMPORTANT:

The session is 2 hours in length, but we are asking that all participants arrive 15 minutes prior to the start time of the session. Are you able to be at the research facility 15 minutes prior to the session time?

• Yes 1-CONTINUE
• No 2-TERMINATE

I would like to invite you to a group discussion on:

The session will last 2 hours in total and you will receive $75 to thank you for your participation. 

Location: 

April 29^th - Calgary
Qualitative Coordination
707 10th Avenue SW - Suite 120
403.229.3500

April 30^th - Toronto
Head Quarters
5075 Yonge Street - Suite 600 / 601
416.929.4669

May 1^st - Trois-Rivières
Hôtel Gouverneur  - 975 rue Hart
819.379.4550

May 2^nd - Fredericton
Delta Hotel - 225 Woodstock Road
506.457.7000

INTERVIEWERS: Tell respondent that it is a small group and anyone who does not show or cancels at the last minute will compromise the project. Make sure they know we feel their opinions are valuable and we are serious about finding out what they have to offer.

NOTE: PLEASE TELL ALL RESPONDENTS THAT THEY WILL RECEIVE A CONFIRMATION CALL THE DAY PRIOR TO THE SESSION. IF FOR SOME REASON THEY HAVE NOT HEARD FROM US THEY SHOULD CONTACT US AT __________. IF THEIR NAME IS NOT ON THE ATTENDANCE FORM THEY WILL NOT BE ADMITTED TO THE GROUP.

Environics Research Group Limited
Groupes de discussion sur les créations de meilleurs emplois
(Initiatives en matière de compétences)
Ressources humaines et Développement des compétences Canada
18228/N7433 - HRSDC

Recrutement pour les groupes de discussion

Nom du répondant: ___________________________________________________________

N^o de téléphone résidentiel: _____________________________________________________

N^o de téléphone d’affaires : ______________________________________________________

Groupe n^o: ________________________________________________________________

Recruteur: _________________________________________________________________

10 recrues par session.

Bonjour, mon nom est _________ d'Environics Research.  Nous téléphonons aujourd’hui pour inviter des participants à assister à un groupe de discussion que nous menons actuellement de la part du Gouvernement du Canada.  Votre participation à cette recherche est entièrement volontaire et votre décision d’y participer ou non n’affectera en rien les interactions que vous pourriez avoir avec le gouvernement.

Toute information recueillie, utilisée et/ou dévoilée sera utilisée qu’à des fins de recherche seulement et sera traitée conformément aux exigences de la Loi sur la protection des renseignements personnels.  La session durera un maximum de 2 heures et vous recevrez une somme en argent comptant en guise de remerciement pour assister à la session.  Est-ce que vous nous permettez de vous poser quelques questions additionnelles, à vous ou à quelqu'un d'autre dans votre foyer, afin de voir si vous qualifiez pour notre étude?

• Oui 1 – CONTINUER
• Non 2 – REMERCIER ET TERMINER

EST-CE QUE VOUS, UNE PERSONNE DE VOTRE FOYER OU DE VOTRE FAMILLE IMMEDIATE TRAVAILLEZ POUR:

• Une firme d'étude de marché, de relations publiques ou une agence de publicité Non Oui
• Un média (radio, télévision, journaux, revues, etc.) Non Oui
• Le Gouvernement du Canada Non Oui

SI OUI À L’UN CI-DESSUS – REMERCIER ET TERMINER

INDIQUER:

• Homme 1 Répartition de 50/50
• Femme 2

ON NOUS A DEMANDÉ DE PARLER AVEC DES PARTICIPANTS DE DIFFÉRENTES CATÉGORIES D’ÂGES. POUR POUVOIR LE FAIRE DE FAÇON EFFICACE, JE VOUS DEMANDERAIS DE BIEN VOULOIR ME DONNER VOTRE ÂGE EXACTE S.V.P.? __________. INSCRIRE

• Moins de 18 ans 1 TERMINER
• 18-24 ans 1 GROUPE 5
• 25-34 ans 2 GROUPE 5
• 35-44 ans 3 GROUPE 6
• 45-60 ans 4 GROUPE 6
• 61 ans ou plus 6 TERMINER

GROUPE 5 DEVRAIT ÊTRE UN PARTAGE DE 50/50 DE 18 À 24 ANS ET 25 À 34 ANS
GROUPE 6 DEVRAIT ÊTRE UN PARTAGE DE 50/50 DE 35 À 44 ANS ET 45 À 60 ANS

POURRIEZ-VOUS ME DIRE QUEL EST LE DERNIER NIVEAU DE SCOLARITÉ QUE VOUS AVEZ TERMINÉ?

• Secondaire en partie seulement 1
• Secondaire terminé 2
• Certificat d'une école de métier .3
• Postesecondaire en partie 4 OBTENIR UN MIXTE
• Postesecondaire terminé 5
• Diplôme universitaire 6

TRAVAILLEZ-VOUS... (VÉRIFIEZ LES QUOTAS)?

• Temps plein (35 hrs +) ( ) 4 minimum
• Temps partiel (moins de 35 hrs) ( ) 2 max.
• Femme au foyer ( ) TERMINER
• Étudiant ( ) 2 max. GROUPE 5
• Retraité ( ) TERMINER
• Sans emploi ( ) 2 max.

QUELLE EST VOTRE OCCUPATION ACTUELLE?

__________________________________
Type d'emploi

_________________________________
Type d'entreprise

SI MARIÉ(E) DEMANDER: QUELLE EST L'OCCUPATION DE VOTRE CONJOINT(E)?

__________________________________
TYPE D'EMPLOI

_________________________________
TYPE D'ENTREPRISE

POURRIEZ-VOUS ME DIRE LAQUELLE DES CATÉGORIES SUIVANTES CORRESPONDS AU REVENU ANNUEL TOTAL, AVANT IMPOT, DE TOUS LES MEMBRES DE VOTRE FOYER, POUR 2012? LIRE

• 01 - Moins de 30,000 $
• 02 - 30,000 $ à 60,000 $
• 03 - 60,000 $ à 80,000 $ OBTENIR UN MIXTE DE REVENUS
• 04 - 80,000 $ à 100,000 $
• 05 - 100,000 $ à 150,000 $
• 06 - 150,000 $ et plus
• 99 - REFUS/NSP/PR TERMINER

QUELLE EST VOTRE ORIGINE ETHNIQUE?

ON DEMANDE AUX PERSONNES QUI PARTICIPENT À DES GROUPES DE DISCUSSION D’ÉMETTRE LEURS OPINIONS ET COMMENTAIRES. DANS QUELLE MESURE VOUS SENTEZ-VOUS À L’AISE D’ÉMETTRE VOS OPINIONS DEVANT D’AUTRES PERSONNES? VOUS SENTEZ-VOUS….(LIRE LA LISTE)

• Très à l'aise 1- MIN 5 PAR GROUPE
• Assez à l'aise 2
• Pas très à l'aise 3- TERMINER
• Très mal à l'aise 4- TERMINER

AVEZ-VOUS DEJA PARTICIPE A UN GROUPE DE DISCUSSION OU A UN ENTRETIEN FACE-A-FACE OÙ L’ON VOUS A REMIS UNE SOMME D’ARGENT, ICI OU AILLEURS?

• Oui 1 MAXIMUM 5 PAR GROUPE
• Non 2 ---> (PASSER À LA Q.13)

SI OUI, DEMANDER:

À QUAND REMONTE LA DERNIÈRE FOIS QUE VOUS AVEZ PARTICIPÉ À UNE DE CES DISCUSSIONS?

____________________________________________________
(TERMINER SI AU COURS DES 6 DERNIERS MOIS)

À COMBIEN DE GROUPES OU D’ENTRETIENS FACE-A-FACE AVEZ-VOUS PARTICIPE AU COURS DES 5 DERNIERES ANNEES?

_____________
(PRÉCISER)

SI PLUS DE 5, TERMINER

ON DEMANDE PARFOIS AUX PARTICIPANTS D’ECRIRE LEURS REPONSES SUR UN QUESTIONNAIRE. Y A-T-IL UNE RAISON QUELCONQUE POUR LAQUELLE VOUS NE POURRIEZ PAS PARTICIPER? SI VOUS AVEZ BESOIN DE LUNETTES POUR LIRE, VEUILLEZ LES APPORTER AVEC VOUS. (AJOUTER DEFICIENCE AUDITIVE)

• Oui 1 - TERMINER
• Non 2

NOTE: TERMINER SI LE RÉPONDANT DIT QU’IL A UN PROBLÈME DE VUE OU D’AUDITION, UN PROBLÈME DE LANGUE ÉCRITE OU VERBALE, UNE INQUIÉTUDE À NE PAS POUVOIR COMMUNIQUER EFFICACEMENT.

INTERVIEWEUR DIRE AU RÉPONDANT

VEUILLEZ APPORTER AVEC VOUS UNE PIÈCE D'IDENTITÉ AVEC PHOTO QUI POURRAIT VOUS ÊTRE DEMANDÉ SUR PLACE.

IMPORTANT:

La session durera 2 heures et nous demandons aux participants d’arriver 15 minutes avant le début de la session. Est-il possible pour vous d’être présent à la salle de recherche 15 minutes avant le début de la session?

• Oui 1 - CONTINUER
• Non 2 - TERMINER

J'aimerais vous inviter à un groupe de discussion qui aura lieu:

La session durera un maximum de 2 heures et vous recevrez la somme de 75 $ en argent comptant en guise de remerciement pour votre participation.

Lieu:

1er mai - Trois-Rivières
Hôtel Gouverneur 
975 rue Hart
819.379.4550

INTERVIEWERS:

Veuillez dire au répondant que les groupes sont petits et que toute personne qui ne se présente pas ou qui annule à la dernière minute compromettront   le projet.  Assurez-vous qu'ils savent que leurs opinions sont importantes pour nous et que nous sommes sérieux de savoir ce qu'ils ont à offrir. 

NOTE:

VEUILLEZ DIRE AUX RÉPONDANTS QU'ILS RECEVRONT UNE CONFIRMATION PAR TÉLÉPHONE LA JOURNÉE AVANT LE GROUPE.  SI POUR UNE RAISON QUELCONQUE ILS N'ONT PAS EU DE NOS NOUVELLES ILS DEVRAIENT NOUS CONTACTER AU  __________.  SI LEUR NOM N'EST PAS SUR LA LISTE DE PRÉSENCE, ILS NE SERONT PAS ADMIS AU GROUPE DE DISCUSSION.

Appendix B – Discussion guide

April 25, 2013

Discussion Guide
Environics Research
HRSDC
Spring 2013 Better Jobs Creative Testing
PN 7433

1.0 Introduction to Procedures (10 minutes)

Welcome to the focus group.  We want to hear your opinions. Feel free to agree or disagree.  Even if you are just one person among ten that takes a certain point of view, you could represent a lot of people who feel the same way as you do.

You don’t have to direct all your comments to me; you can exchange ideas and arguments with each other too.

There are some observers watching the session on the other side of the two way mirror and they are part of the research team. We are also video-taping this session to help me write my report. The video will only used internally to analyse the research and will not be released to anyone else. I may take some notes during the group to remind myself of things also. Anything you say here will remain confidential and anonymous and any comments you make will not be linked to you by name in any reporting we do on this project.

I should also mention that I work for a public opinion research company. I did not create any of the materials we will be looking at nor do I work for the client who commissioned the materials.

The host/hostess will pay you your incentives at the end of the session.

[Warm up]

Let’s go around the table so that each of you can tell us your name and a little bit about yourself, such as who lives with you in your house, what kind of work you do if you work outside the home etc...

2.0 TV Ad testing – written exercise (10 minutes)

We are going to begin tonight’s session by looking at a TV advertisement.  The ad is in the final stages of development. The voice-over will be higher quality and some of the displayed text may change, but it is nearly complete.

I’m going to give you each a written exercise to complete about the ad and then we will discuss what everyone has written and what you think of the ad.

[DISTRIBUTE WRITTEN EXERCISE]

You will see that the written exercises ask you some questions:

• First of all, there is a section where I want you to write down what you think is the main message of the ad. In other words what is this ad trying to say?
• Next it asks who you think this ad is directed at.
• Next you will describe how you feel (in other words any emotions) after watching the ad. (NB IF NECESSARY MODERATOR TO EXPLAIN – sometimes an ad could make you feel many different ways such as: relieved, happy, angry, amused, interested, curious, etc….)
• Next, you’ll write down the one thing that stands out from the ad (something you heard or saw).

PRESENT THE AD TWICE AND HAVE PARTICIPANTS COMPLETE THE WRITTEN EXERCISE AFTER THE SECOND AD PRESENTATION

After you have finished, please turn over the exercises, put your pen down so that I know you’re done.

3.0 TV Ad testing – Discussion of reactions (30 minutes)

OK, now let’s talk about the ad. 

MODERATOR TO GO AROUND THE TABLE AND ASK EACH PARTICIPANT: What is the main message of this ad? What did you write down?

**[If confusion about the tagline “subject to parliamentary approval,” explain that the Canada Job Grant is under negotiation, implementation planned for 2014. More information on that is available on the website]**

NB: PEOPLE ARE TO RECITE WHAT THEY ACTUALLY WROTE FIRST AND THEN THEY CAN ELABORATE – WE WANT TO HEAR WHAT PEOPLE WROTE BEFORE THEY HEARD ANY OTHER GROUP MEMBERS SPEAK.

PROBE: Is the message clear to you?

What did you think of that message?

Would you say that this ad does a good job of getting its message across or not?

MODERATOR TO GO AROUND THE TABLE AND ASK EACH PARTICIPANT: Who did you each say this ad was directed at? Who do you think the ad is meant for? What did you each write down?

MODERATOR TO GO AROUND THE TABLE AND ASK PARTICIPANTS: What did you feel after watching this ad? What did you write down? Why did it make you feel that way? (NB:POSSIBLERESPONSES: amused, interested, bored, indifferent, curious

MODERATOR TO GO AROUND THE TABLE AND ASK PARTICIPANTS: What was the one thing you heard or saw in that ad that stood out the most that you wrote down initially?

Is the ad informative to you? 

Does the ad make it clear how you can get more information?

Were there any other messages in the ad beyond the principle one you wrote?

4.0 AD Content Discussion (30 minutes)

MODERATOR TO READ:  “The Canada Job Grant is designed to help the unemployed get a job, and help those underemployed get a better job.

• $5,000 would come from the Federal Government
• $5,000 or more would come from business
• $5,000 would come from the province or territory

$15,000 or more would go to individuals towards training at an eligible institution.”

• Prior to coming to this focus group had or read anything about the Canada Job Grant? What did you hear?
• What are your impressions of the Canada Job Grant? Will it be helpful in your area or province? Why?
• Thinking about skills training and Canada’s job market do you think the Government of Canada is on the right/wrong track? Why?
• Can you suggest anything else the Government could be doing in the area of skills development that is currently missing?

That concludes the session. This research is being conducted for Human Resources and Social Development Canada, which is a department of the Government of Canada. On their behalf I would like to thank you for your participation in this session.

THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING!

WRITTEN EXERCISE

What is the main message of this ad?

Who is this ad directed at?

How did you feel after watching this ad?

What was the one thing you heard or saw that stood out the most?

Le 25 avril 2013

Guide de discussion
Environics Research
RHDCC
Analyse de la pub sur de meilleurs emplois - printemps 2013
PN 7433

1.0 Introduction à la procédure (10 minutes)

Bienvenue au groupe de discussion. Nous voulons entendre vos opinions. Sentez-vous libres d’être d’accord ou en désaccord. Même si vous n’êtes qu’une personne sur dix à avoir un certain point de vue, vous pouvez représenter une foule de gens qui sont du même avis.

Vous n’avez pas à m’adresser tous vos commentaires ; vous pouvez aussi échanger des idées et des arguments les uns avec les autres.

Des observateurs qui font partie de l’équipe de recherche regardent la séance de l’autre côté de la glace sans tain. Nous filmons aussi la séance pour m’aider à en faire le compte rendu. La vidéo ne sera utilisée qu’à l’interne pour analyser la recherche et ne sera pas autrement diffusée. Il se peut que je prenne des notes comme aide-mémoire dans le cours de la discussion. Tout ce que vous direz ici restera confidentiel et anonyme. Les commentaires que vous ferez ne vous seront attribués dans aucun de nos comptes rendus de ce projet.

Je devrais aussi mentionner que je travaille pour une maison de recherche sur l’opinion publique. Je n’ai pas créé le matériel que vous regarderez et je ne travaille pas non plus pour le client qui l’a commandé.

L’hôte/hôtesse vous versera votre cachet à la fin de la séance.

[Réchauffement]

Faisons un tour de table pour vous permettre de vous nommer et de parler un peu de vous, par exemple, avec qui vous habitez, la sorte de travail que vous faites si vous travaillez à l’extérieur de la maison, etc.

2.0 Analyse de la pub de télé – exercice écrit (10 minutes)

Nous entamerons la séance de ce soir en regardant une publicité de télévision. La pub est dans les dernières phases d’élaboration. La voix off sera de meilleure qualité et le texte qui est affiché peut changer, mais elle est presque complète.

Je donnerai à chacun de vous un exercice écrit à compléter au sujet de la pub et nous discuterons ensuite de ce que vous avez écrit et de ce que vous en pensez.
[DISTRIBUER L’EXERCICE ÉCRIT]

Vous verrez que l’exercice écrit renferme des questions :

• Il y a d’abord une section où je veux que vous écriviez ce qui vous apparaît comme le principal message de la pub. Autrement dit, que tente de dire cette pub ?
• Ensuite, on vous demande à qui vous croyez que la pub s’adresse.
• Décrivez ensuite ce que vous ressentez après avoir vu la pub (autrement dit, vos émotions). (N.B. : L’ANIMATEUR EXPLIQUERA AU BESOIN – une pub peut parfois inspirer plusieurs sentiments différents, comme : soulagement, bonheur, colère, amusement, intérêt, curiosité, etc.)
• Enfin, noter l’élément qui ressort de la pub pour vous (quelque chose que vous avez entendu ou vu).

PRÉSENTER LA PUB DEUX FOIS ET DEMANDER AUX PARTICIPANTS DE COMPLÉTER L’EXERCICE ÉCRIT APRÈS LA SECONDE PRÉSENTATION

Lorsque vous aurez fini, retournez les feuilles d’exercice et posez votre stylo pour que je sache que vous avez fini.

3.0 Analyse de la pub de télé – Discussion des réactions (30 minutes)

D’accord, parlons maintenant de la pub.  L’ANIMATEUR FAIT LE TOUR DE LA TABLE ET DEMANDE À CHAQUE PARTICIPANT : Quel est le principal message de la pub ? Qu’avez-vous écrit ?

N.B. : [S’il y a confusion à propos de la ligne de la fin « sous réserve de l’approbation du Parlement », expliquer que la subvention canadienne pour l’emploi est en cours de négociation, la mise en œuvre est prévue pour 2014. Plus de renseignements sont disponibles sur le site Web]**

N.B. : LES PARTICIPANTS DOIVENT D’ABORD LIRE À HAUTE VOIX CE QU’ILS ONT ÉCRIT, ILS POURRONT ENSUITE ENTRER DANS LES DÉTAILS – NOUS VOULONS ENTENDRE CE QU’ILS ONT ÉCRIT AVANT QU’ILS ENTENDENT LES AUTRES MEMBRES DU GROUPE PARLER.

EXPLORER : Le message est-il clair pour vous ?

Qu’avez-vous pensé de ce message ?

Diriez-vous que la pub passe efficacement le message ou non ?
L’ANIMATEUR FAIT LE TOUR DE LA TABLE ET DEMANDE À CHAQUE PARTICIPANT : À qui croyez-vous que la pub s’adresse ? Qu’avez-vous noté ?

L’ANIMATEUR FAIT LE TOUR DE LA TABLE ET DEMANDE À CHAQUE PARTICIPANT : Qu’avez-vous pensé après avoir vu la pub ? Qu’avez-vous noté ? Pourquoi vous a-t-elle inspiré ce sentiment ? (N.B. :RÉPONSES POSSIBLES : amusé(e), intéressé(e), ennuyé(e), indifférent(e) , curieux(se))

L’ANIMATEUR FAIT LE TOUR DE LA TABLE ET DEMANDE À CHAQUE PARTICIPANT : Qu’avez-vous entendu ou vu dans cette pub qui vous a le plus frappé et que vous avez d’abord noté ?

La pub est-elle instructive pour vous ?

La pub établit-elle clairement où vous pouvez obtenir plus de renseignements ?

Y avait-il d’autres messages dans la pub en plus du principe que vous avez noté ?

4.0 Discussion du contenu de la pub (30 minutes)

L’ANIMATEUR LIRA:  «la Subvention canadienne pour l'emploi est destinée à aider les chômeurs à obtenir un emploi et aider les personnes sous-employées à obtenir un meilleur emploi.

• 5 000 $ du gouvernement fédéral
• 5 000 $ ou plus des entreprises
• 5 000 $ de la province ou du territoire

Donc, 15 000 $ ou plus aux particuliers en vue de formation dans une institution admissible. »

• Avant de participer à ce groupe de discussion, aviez-vous lu à propos ou entendu parler de la subvention canadienne pour l’emploi ? Qu’aviez-vous entendu dire ?
• Quelles sont vos impressions de la subvention canadienne pour l’emploi ? Sera-t-elle utile dans votre région ou dans votre province ? Pourquoi ?
• À propos de formation et du marché de l’emploi au Canada, croyez-vous que le Gouvernement du Canada est sur la bonne voie ou non ? Pourquoi ?
• Pouvez-vous suggérer autre chose que le gouvernement pourrait faire en matière de développement des compétences ?

Cela conclut la séance. Cette recherche est effectuée pour le compte de Ressources humaines et Développement des compétences Canada, qui est un ministère du Gouvernement du Canada. En son nom, je voudrais vous remercier d’avoir participé à cette séance.

MERCI D’AVOIR PARTICIPÉ !

EXERCICE ÉCRIT

Quel est le principal message de cette pub ?

À qui cette pub s’adresse-t-elle ?

Qu’avez-vous ressenti après avoir vu la pub ?

Qu’avez-vous vu ou entendu qui vous a le plus frappé ?

Appendix C – Creative Materials Tested

StoryBoard A

Open to a young man, in his kitchen, getting ready for work. It is a modest but well-kept house. He is dressed casually, pouring his morning coffee into a travel mug.

Man VO: I’ve been trying to find a new job for a while now…

Young man looks thoughtfully out the kitchen window.

Man VO: …but I don’t have the right skills.

Young man looks toward camera as he is about to exit the house. We hear his thoughts.

Man VO: How can I get more training?

Female aerospace engineering technician

Female announcer voiceover: With the new Canada Job Grant... 

Ship welding

Super:
Canada  Job Grant $15,000 or more
Subject to Parliamentary Approval

Female announcer voiceover: the Government of Canada will partner with businesses…

Pipeline Worker

Female announcer voiceover: …provinces and territories…

Female construction apprentice

Female announcer voiceover: … to help Canadians get the right skills…

Shot of mining trucks at work.

Female announcer voiceover: …for available jobs.

Close-up shot of a man driving the truck in the mine, as he has been hired.

Female announcer voiceover: The Canada Job Grant will result in one important thing - a new or better job.

Zoom out and transitioned scene to animated mosaic of pre-existing footage

Super:
Canada’s Economic Action Plan Logo
ActionPlan.gc.ca/Skills
1 800 O-Canada

Female announcer voiceover: Visit ActionPlan.gc.ca/Skills.

StoryBoard B

Open to a young man, in his kitchen, getting ready for work. It is a modest but well-kept house. He is dressed casually, pouring his morning coffee into a travel mug.

Man VO: I’ve been working hard for the past few weeks trying to find a new job…

Young man looks thoughtfully out the kitchen window.

Man VO: …but I don’t have the right skills for the jobs available.

Young man looks toward camera as he is about to exit the house. We hear his thoughts.

Man VO: How can I get more training?

Female aerospace engineering technician

Female announcer voiceover: With the new Canada Job Grant... 

Ship welding

Super:
Canada  Job Grant $15,000 or more
Subject to Parliamentary Approval

Female announcer voiceover: the Government of Canada will partner with businesses…

Pipeline Worker

Female announcer voiceover: … to help Canadians get the right skills…

Female construction apprentice

Female announcer voiceover: …for available jobs.

Shot of mining trucks at work.

Female announcer voiceover: …providing $15,000 or more per person.

Close-up shot of a man driving the truck in the mine, as he has been hired.

Female announcer voiceover: The Canada Job Grant will result in one important thing – a new or better job.

Zoom out and transitioned scene to animated mosaic of pre-existing footage

Super:
Canada’s Economic Action Plan Logo
ActionPlan.gc.ca/Skills
1 800 O-Canada

Female announcer voiceover: Visit ActionPlan.gc.ca/Skills.

Canada Wordmark

Female announcer voiceover: A message from the Government of Canada