Background. Indoor radioactive radon gas stands as a prominent contributor to lung cancer, a threat that can be readily identified and addressed. Despite the accessibility of testing and mitigation measures, their adoption rates remain disproportionately low. There is a research gap in understanding why people hesitate to test and mitigate radon. Qualitative research is crucial to identify motivations, barriers, and facilitators, serving as a valuable tool in addressing this knowledge gap and improving radon management practices. Objective. This article presents the methodology of a qualitative research study developed in the framework of the RadoNorm European research project and applied in two French regions to investigate the barriers and facilitators in radon management in homes from the dual perspective of representatives of local public administrations (LPA) who have implemented a radon management action and inhabitants who engaged in radon management activities. Design. Two groups of respondents were identified and recruited with a combination of strategies. Individual interviews were performed based on an open-ended interview method. Theoretical models helped to design the questions, cover the range of possible answers, and provide a practical approach for the qualitative analysis. Data management and ethical considerations were addressed. Results. Together 13 barriers/facilitators were identified for the LPA and 9 for inhabitants, all supported by tangible elements, and then classified in a Strength Weakness Opportunities Threat (SWOT) matrix. The collection of a dual point of views allows cross-discussion on common topics: radon communication, temporality, and follow-up. Conclusion. The research provides a methodologically-sound approach to investigate the barriers and facilitators in radon management in French homes. The results can be used by different parties to implement effective and experience-based improvements of the process of radon management, notably with the development of qualitative indicators for efficiency, improved follow-up of the exposed/concerned inhabitants in the long run and engaging reflection for minimising the cost and the complexity of radon mitigation.