Debriefing

Debriefing is a method that supports participants in reflecting on a method shortly after it has been used. Debriefing creates space to share thoughts, feelings, and ideas. This makes sense of what happened and strengthens personal, social, and sometimes institutional learning. At the outset, it is important to be clear about the rationale for undertaking a debriefing, as the approach will vary depending on the objective. If the aim is to provide participants with closure on an experience, the process may be more informal. If the aim is to report back to a funder or policymaker, the process will need to be more structured and formalised. In both cases, debriefing can help participants process complex feelings, recognise their own knowledge, and identify next steps, while also increasing the likelihood of longer-term personal impact.

In this module Kármen Czett explains how Debriefing was used within PLANET4B. In this video she introduces the Debriefing Method:

Key Features

Group size:

Ideal for 6 to 12 participants, however this could change depending on the method and participants. Can be scaled up with multiple parallel sessions.

Timeframe:

• The timeframe will depend on the method being debriefed and the group involved. A shorter method may be effectively debriefed in around 45 minutes, while a more in-depth discussion could extend to one or two hours.
• In the PLANET4B project, a minimum of 1–2 days and a maximum of 2–3 weeks was left between the method and debriefing. This time is intended to allow participants to process the experience, without leaving so much time that key reflections or events were forgotten. Although in the PLANET4B project, debriefing occurred days or weeks after the method, holding a separate session with participants may not be possible in all contexts, in which case the debriefing can take place immediately after the original activity.

Skills Needed:

A debrief method works best if you have the following skills, or can source them:

Facilitation skills:

• Inclusivity – Create a safe, welcoming environment where everyone feels comfortable participating and sharing their views.
• Sensitivity – Be aware of power dynamics, cultural differences, and the potential for difficult or emotional topics to emerge — and respond with care and empathy.
• Trust-building – Foster trust within the group by encouraging active listening (giving full attention to the speaker without planning your response while they are talking), openness, and respect for different ways of communicating.
• Conflict-resolution – Handle disagreements or tensions in a constructive and respectful manner that allows space for multiple perspectives to be heard.
• Coordination – Manage time effectively and keep the group focused, ensuring that objectives are met without rushing or excluding contributions.

Project management skills:

• Planning and coordination - including scheduling, booking a suitable room, organising materials and food
• Ethics – ensure ethical procedures are followed and participants understand the purpose of contributing to the method, distribute consent forms and participant information sheets

Budget and materials:

Debriefing can be a low-cost method, but some budget should be allocated for:

• Space hire
• Refreshments and food
• Materials such as paper and pens, mood cards, printed prompts, drawing materials, symbolic cards, or natural objects
• Ethics forms and participant information sheets

Debriefing can be employed as a research method to study how participants make sense of methods and collective experiences. It offers an opportunity to capture how people reflect on meaning, process, and outcomes, providing valuable insight into individual and group learning. The points below outline key considerations when employing debriefing in a research context.

Data generation

• Debriefing can generate layered forms of data, including transcripts of discussions, observational notes on group dynamics, and visual data such as photos of mood cards, sketches, or drawings that capture reflections during the process.
• Additional materials may include notes written on flipcharts, photographs taken with consent, or detailed fieldnotes documenting moments of interaction.
• Strategies for handling this variety include keeping structured logs of sessions, organising digital files with clear labels and dates, and ensuring data is stored securely but remains accessible to the research team.
• Careful organisation of debriefing data supports transparency and accountability, while making it possible to revisit material alongside participants or compare across different groups.

Ethics

• Debriefing often brings out candid or emotional responses, which makes ethical practice particularly important.
• Informed consent should be obtained in advance, clarifying how data will be stored, anonymised, and used in academic publications or other outputs.
• Researchers should explain clearly whether anonymised quotations may appear in journal articles, reports, or presentations, and participants should have the option to decline such use.
• Providing opportunities for participants to review or retract material prior to dissemination can help maintain trust and accountability.

Analytical strategies

• Debriefing data can be explored inductively through grounded approaches that allow concepts to emerge from the material, or deductively by relating reflections to policy frameworks, institutional discourses, or project goals.
• Thematic, narrative, and discourse analysis can each provide insights into how participants articulate meaning, construct stories, or use language, silence, and metaphor to frame collective understanding.
• Visual and affective dimensions can be examined through analysis of sketches, drawings, mood cards, or photographs, attending to symbolism, emotional expression, and non-verbal ways of making sense of experience.
• Comparative and longitudinal analysis can place different groups or sessions alongside one another, or trace how understandings shift across time, revealing divergences, commonalities, and turning points.
• Triangulation and validation strategies, including peer debriefing and participant review, can strengthen credibility by testing interpretations against multiple perspectives, data sources, and analytic lenses.

Positionality

• The researcher’s role as facilitator shapes the knowledge that emerges in debriefing sessions.
• Decisions about which questions are asked, how conversations are steered, and which voices are amplified all influence the resulting data.
• Reflexive practice involves recognising these dynamics and considering how positionality, power relations, or institutional affiliations affect the process.

Theoretical framing

• Debriefing can be situated within participatory and reflexive research traditions that emphasise dialogue and collective meaning-making.
• It aligns with constructivist epistemologies that understand knowledge as relational and situated, and with critical pedagogical approaches that treat reflection as central to learning and transformation.
• The method resonates with traditions in evaluation research, organisational learning, and participatory action research, where feedback loops are seen as essential to both knowledge production and practice change.