December 15, 2022
December 15, 2022
This is part two of a two-part series. You can check out part one here.
Last week, I explored what it looks like to hire researchers for the first time onto your team, including creating a framework and going through interview and evaluation processes.
After many bumps and bruises, I hired my first user researcher. After that, I continued to scale the team up to five people. I then left that team and, down the road, joined another large team that I helped to scale.
Through those experiences, I learned a lot about building and structuring a user research team. It isn't easy, but it is incredibly rewarding. Not only are you positively impacting the user research field, but you are helping to grow others into effective researchers.
Structuring a research team is the next step—and a big one. Coming up with a structure for the team is one of my least favorite parts of this process because it is a loaded decision. It can impact how researchers work with other departments, stakeholders, and each other.
I've worked on research teams in three (and a half) ways. Of course, each has pros and cons, and it's up to you to decide on the best set-up for your organization. Let's explore them below.
Embedded means that a researcher is part of a team. There are two types of embedded styles:
Regardless of whether it’s one or more teams (typically more than one team if you are a solo UXR), researchers in the embedded model work directly with product managers, developers, and other team members. They help the team strategize and prioritize research within the team's scope.
Sometimes the researcher reports directly to their product team, such as a product manager. However, I always ensure that they report to a user research manager if this is the case.
One huge advantage of the embedded model is that researchers are an inherent part of each project. They participate in planning sessions and meetings with the rest of the team, making research more visible. This can lead to teams naturally embedding research into the product development process.
There are two main disadvantages I've seen with the embedded model:
The centralized user research team is the exact opposite of an embedded model and is sometimes called the “agency model”.
In this setup, researchers are part of the same core team and hop on and off projects based on availability and requests. This model is much more like a consultancy: a request comes in, a researcher is put on the project, presents the work, and then moves on to a new request.
One benefit of this approach is that researchers work on various projects, getting exposure to many parts of the business. In addition, this approach can help researchers develop a variety of skills.
However, with the agency approach, I've seen quite a few disadvantages:
The hybrid approach attempts to take the best of both worlds. There are a few different ways to structure hybrid models, but I’ll walk through the one I have used.
In a hybrid model, there are two sections:
This approach means you have some researchers who work deeply with your different product teams, focusing on that exact problem area. They are essentially embedded in that team, helping them prioritize and strategize research projects. These researchers support and conduct the research for their teams.
Then you have a centralized team of researchers. These team members look at high-level and strategic projects, such as service blueprints, persona generation, and organizational innovation. They’re focused on cross-departmental research.
It is possible, if necessary, to shuffle the research team around every so often to ensure team members get to try both sections. Just make sure there is excellent hand-off and knowledge sharing if you do this.
I'm biased, but I always go for the embedded or hybrid model, depending on how many researchers are on my team. I also consider my team's strengths and development areas. If there isn't an opportunity to do larger strategic projects within embedded teams, I consider a hybrid structure to give my team the ability to cultivate those skills.
Always remember that you can change and iterate on the structure if it isn't working.
Learn more about how structure impacts a research team's efficiency.
As you scale the team and add more researchers, make sure you’re always going back to the basics and thinking about:
Hire a ResearchOps person as soon as possible, as this will help your researchers focus on their craft. In addition, having an expert specializing in operations will make your life much easier.
Other vital roles to consider are:
As you grow your team, you may find a mish-mash of perspectives and past experiences. In addition, team members may have different ways of working. Therefore, during this phase, it’s essential to align processes to ensure efficient and effective collaboration and communication.
Here are a handful of things to keep in mind:
Quality tools – Assess tools and recruitment processes to make sure they still work for the number of researchers on your team. It may be possible that more researchers mean different or new tools with higher capacity.
When a team grows, there might be times when researchers have downtime. This downtime can be unsettling for some people, so having a backlog of to-dos is helpful.
Here are some downtime activities researchers can think about:
The final aspect of this article is about your team's continued growth and development. Happy employees have opportunities for learning and advancing in their careers. You are responsible for your team's development as a team lead.
This continuous stage requires iteration as the team grows and gains shape.
Remember the career framework you worked created? That career framework is helpful for development plans and review cycles.
Feedback is key for growth. We don't know how to improve our craft and further our careers without feedback. Set up a standard review cycle where your employees can get feedback consistently. The review cycles I've worked with happen at the same time every six months, but I know companies also base them on start dates.
Before each review, you ask the employee to pick two or three people they worked closely with in the past six months. These colleagues provide feedback, and you anonymize the input to share with the employee, including your own (as a manager).
Then, have a discussion and create goals based on the feedback. You can use this template to facilitate discussion and this other template to develop goals.
Your employees might get a lot working with you, but just like any other relationship, you can't provide them with everything. I always try to give the team additional resources or opportunities where they can learn. Sometimes outside advice is the best you can hear.
Make a list of external resources your team can use, such as:
If your team is stuck in different areas, enabling them to find help can be the key to unblocking them. As mentioned, you won't have the answer to everything, and you won't have the capacity to be there as much as you might want. Bring them other opportunities, so they stay satisfied and motivated.
Something else I've implemented on my teams is learning time. Every week, team members put the time in their calendars to learn. Team members can dedicate this learning time to reading a book, taking a course, watching relevant YouTube videos, reading relevant articles, going to events during the workday, or networking with other researchers.
As you grow your team, you will naturally have to consider culture. What type of team do you want to be? How do you want to act as a team? What are your values? Your visions?
Hopefully, you can step back from the tactical and operational side of research to focus on building a team culture that works.
Here are a few areas to consider:
Be open to your team for feedback! The best managers and team leads I've worked with are those willing to hear constructive feedback and take action.
Building, structuring, and growing a research team is a big undertaking but worth the effort. The times I've had this opportunity, I have learned so much from each experience. It is both rewarding and humbling work. Although it may feel overwhelming, always know that you aren't alone!
Nikki Anderson-Stanier is the founder of User Research Academy and a qualitative researcher with 9 years in the field. She loves solving human problems and petting all the dogs.
To get even more UXR nuggets, check out her user research membership, follow her on LinkedIn, or subscribe to her Substack.