You Are Doing User Research Wrong
Why research often fails to maximize its potential
You are doing user research wrong. I’m not talking about the execution of research, but how UX research is used within an organization. User research is often underutilized, leading to unrealized business impact.
Imagine this: Your product is starting to mature. The company is starting to expand into new markets and customer segments. It doesn’t come as naturally to know what to build next. You look at some of the most successful tech companies and see they all have dedicated user researchers. You think that hiring your own researcher is the logical next step.
You hire a research all-star.
Things seem promising at first.
They help improve a product area and you see an immediate impact.
But then the excitement wanes.
People don’t know how to use the research.
The researcher keeps asking for more budget.
Research takes longer than you think it should and becomes a bottleneck to decision-making.
Does any of this sound familiar to you? If so, keep on reading. This post will give a high-level overview of why things go wrong, how research is misused, and how to build a research foundation integrated into your company culture and has business impact. Everything in this post can probably have a deep dive post dedicated to it. So if you feel you need more insights into any one thing, let me know!
Why Things Go Wrong
Many things can go wrong when integrating user research into an organization, but they often come down to one of three foundational issues.
Organizational Challenges
Organizational silos
A researcher is siloed within the design org, or even worse, the marketing org. The function works in a vacuum and doesn’t interface with other parts of the business.
Lack of research integration into product workflows
Researchers are treated as consultants and don’t have the context on the products to dive deep into the issues to generate meaningful insights. This leads to shallow takeaways that aren’t actionable and have everyone saying, “duh.”
Slow insights (too much red tape)
There is often too much red tape around doing research. This can come in the form of getting permission for budgets, accessing users/customers considered off-limits by the sales and customer success teams, or legal and privacy making it difficult to get approvals.
Research Literacy
Lack of understanding of what research is and what it can do
Some may not have experience working with dedicated researchers and don’t understand the value it can bring. They have little understanding, and education, and haven’t seen research demonstrate anything of value.
Poor communication of how research impacts the business
Research can fall short when their insights don’t speak to business results. Too many are great researchers but have poor business acumen and little product sense.
Prioritizing certain types of data over others
Research is just one data point, but so are the data points from other functions such as data science. Some organizations may prioritize and value certain data points over research data points, which causes research to be viewed as less important.
Cultural Barriers
Lack of user-centered mindset at leadership levels
Some leaders may not have a UX background and believe user-centered products aren’t a must-have (to be fair, in some industries this is probably correct). Others may think they have gotten this far without proper research, so why start now?
A fear of uncomfortable truths
Sometimes research reveals issues and challenges that are easier to sweep under the rug. It can uncover that the team’s strategy and current thinking is misguided. Rather than fight that and convince leadership otherwise, it's easier to just not do the research and chalk a failed experiment or product launch up to valuable learnings. However, teams could have discovered these learnings much earlier if they had just done the research.
The Misuse of Research
Other times, research can be integrated into an organization correctly, but the way research is used can lend itself to not having the impact it should.
Used for Validation, not understanding
Research confirms assumptions instead of challenging them
Validating assumptions is fine in some instances. But research should also push the boundaries, develop new hypotheses, and forge innovative product direction. Otherwise, research is just going to be there to justify ideas rather than uncover new ones.
Testing solutions instead of exploring user needs
Again, testing solutions in UXR isn’t a bad thing. But if it’s not combined with exploring new needs and problems, research will be viewed as unnecessary when budgets get tight.
Performed too late in the product cycle
Research should often come first in the product life cycle, not last. If research is done throughout, you will be in a good spot. If it’s done once and doesn’t iterate, it will become stale.
Disconnected from the business
Viewed as a checkbox rather than a strategic tool
Too many teams view research as nice to have or as something they do to validate the direction of the team. Instead, it should be used to help shape strategy through the voice of the user. When it is used strategically, it can deliver new products, transform old ones, and lift the tide of an entire business.
Disconnected from decision-making
Sometimes researchers aren’t in the room when decisions are being made. Other times, research is disregarded or forgotten when during critical conversations. When user insights are front and center in decision-making, decisions will be made correctly the first time, and business/user tradeoffs will be known upfront so no surprises occur down the road.
Building a Research Foundation
The following are ways research can be utilized to its full potential in any organization.
Make research a strategic function
Involve researchers in product planning and prioritization
Research output and researchers themselves should be heavily involved in product planning. Planning should start with the user problems and opportunities that researchers have discovered and should drive the themes of the roadmap to meet business goals. Researchers shouldn’t feel like their work is constrained due to hierarchy. There should be a direct line from research to leadership so they have all the data points needed to make informed decisions. Additionally, planning should be built around research findings. The language of user problems should be built into documents, reviews, and products.
Embed researchers into product teams
At every company, researchers should be the most knowledgeable people about the product and how users use it. This can only be done by embedding researchers into product teams. They should be in sync with product managers, designers, engineers, data scientists, product marketers, etc. By embedding them, researchers can become strategic partners, not consultants. Research will naturally be brought in throughout the product life cycle when embedded in teams and show value.
Communicate insights in business terms
Translate findings into the language of business
“If we do X, it will lead to Y users being happier” vs “If we do A, it will reduce churn by B% and land to C% more revenue.” It’s easier to get buy-in when research findings move the business forward.
As much as researchers are in it to make users' lives better, most products and businesses aren’t charities. Everything researchers do needs to benefit the business in the long run. Learning how to appeal to the needs of the business is essential for research to have an impact.
Business impact can come by reducing churn, increasing revenue, reducing spend to find PMF, increasing user engagement, etc. Every researcher needs to understand what metric their team/company cares about and tailor their research to move that metric in the right direction.
Use compelling narratives, not just data dumps
No one takes the time to understand and read through all the data. Researchers need to communicate like a salesperson. Understand what the business wants/needs. Speak to those wants/needs. Communicate succinctly as to what the team needs to do to address those wants/needs. That’s it. Don’t show your work upfront. This isn’t an academic paper. Throw all that in the appendix of your deck. After all, people make decisions based on narratives sprinkled with data.
Range of research
Have a balance of the type of research conducted
This article does a good job of explaining the need for multiple types of research. The article talks about 1) Strategic research, which is foundational, business-first, and future thinking, 2) Product research focused on user needs and product development, and 3) Tactical research focused on usability and optimization.
The author argues that researchers spend too much time doing #2 and should spend more time on #1 and #3. Too much research focused on preferences and concept testing limits research to be a function that gives thumbs up or thumbs down to ideas rather than one that drives business strategy and moves metrics. A careful balance of all three types of research helps maximize the potential of research to be a core part of an organization.
That’s A Wrap
Utilizing some of these tips and removing barriers takes time. It requires showing the value of research through proper execution. However once a team catches the research wave, organizations can be transformed to have a user-first mentality, which will ultimately drive sustained business value. As I mentioned earlier, each of these points can likely be its own post. Let me know if you’d like a deep dive into any of them!