Making research effective
by Todd WilkensWhy do good research efforts fail? Why do good insights fail to make it into the actual design of products and services? Why do the things we learned about users generally disappear at the end of a project? One reason is that, in many organizations, research is done by a department or group that is mostly divorced from the rest of the design and development process. They are given a set of requirements, go do the research, and then pass the findings back over a wall in the form of research reports and power point presentations. Designers, developers, and management read these once then file them away on a shelf or a folder on their computer to be forgotten. The most successful organizations break this cycle. If your company is in the business of creating user-centered products and services then your whole organization should be oriented toward gaining and maintaining customer insights.
It’s become a pet project to diagnose and collect solutions to these kinds of problems. There are lots of approaches to doing this effectively in different organizations. And even small steps can have profound effects. I’ll be sharing what I’ve learned in my session on Day 3 of UX Week on Making Research Effective. My session should make a great complement to the excellent sessions that day by Emily Ulrich on Reserch Methods in the Workplace, Josh Porter on The Psychology of Social Design, Barbara Ballard on Mobile Usability Testing, and AP’s own Rachel Hinman on Mobile Research Techniques.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, July 12th, 2007 at 6:26 am and is filed under Adaptive Path, Plugs, Uncategorized, user research.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This post is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
July 12th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
How about organizing the “gaining and maintaining customer insights” in an organization in the fashion of religious practice? Single, isolated research activities and utilizing the insights gained in them, are usually very short in duration (hours, days, weeks, or months). But the lifespan, applicability and usefulness of solid research insights is relatively long. To maintain the distance, right rituals are needed to enforce the right beliefs on the importance of research, it’s practice, produced insights and its impacts.
July 12th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
“The most successful organizations break this cycle”
I would love to think so, but could you give any examples? It can be so hard to convince clients, and good case studies of well known companies (outside our own work) are always helpful.
July 16th, 2007 at 1:41 am
We used something called Design Space which gave people,from all the disciplines needed to create new things, a mental and often a physical space where they came together, chewed over the insights described ideas that could address the insight, align with or challenge strategy; define winning concepts, demonstrate prototypes and deliver winning offers that change the life of the customer/consumer/user. The key is that people leave their departments behind at the “door” and only bring their knowledge to interact and create new “things”.(no silos- needs head of department leadership too!- trust the process). Jerry Hirschberg (Nissan’s Design Director in California) talks in ‘The Creative Priority’ in the chapter-’synthesis’ talks of doing research as a group “Yet there were no grand expectations. No one’s performance was being judged by whether or not anything of value came from each encounter…… We compiled our varied richess… We had not found any solutions and answers….As we stood back from this kaleidoscopic array of direct experience, however, one consistent theme did emerge. ….they wanted arond 6 inches more room …for extra cargo….And yet simultaneously they praised the ease with which it could be parked… and pleaded that the vehicle should not be made one inch longer…..Confronted with these apparently contradictary requests the designers [including the researchers] set to work on resolving the issue not the input which led to a mini-breakthrough……
Nissan’s team was working in what I call Design Space! where all knowledge can interact and imagination and creativity can make truly innovative leaps. Its the interactions that count but decision makers need to support the cativity or it is just throwing mud against the silo walls.