February 11, 2021
February 11, 2021
More often than not, I hear about how user researchers work in a vacuum—either separate from other researchers or their respective product teams.
While working independently can definitely award you some awesome creative freedom, it can be difficult to bounce ideas off others or get feedback on your work. I always say the best way to learn and grow is to get feedback from others, and it is especially essential in our role as user researchers.
Even when a few of us worked as researchers, we didn't always work together in my previous roles. In fact, more often than not, we wouldn't have time to double-check a methodology or get feedback on an approach since research can move so quickly.
When faced with this problem, I looked toward similar product roles to researchers, which is when I got inspired by design reviews. In these reviews, designers would present work or talk through a prototype before usability testing and get feedback on their approach and flow.
I created a user research review at that organization, and I have implemented it in every role since! Don't have a team of researchers at your organization? You can easily ask designers, product managers, and developers to give you feedback.
The best way we learn is to have open-ended conversations with others on our approaches. When you explain a concept or idea to others, you more easily find opportunities for improvement. You get a diverse set of perspectives on a problem you are struggling with or approach you are unsure about.
When you receive constructive feedback from others, you expand your knowledge and shift how you think about problems. You may learn to look at things slightly differently or include an extra few steps to your approach.
The purpose is for others to provide objective, outside insight and questioning so that you can self-evaluate your work. The feedback provided during the research review is to incite contemplation and discussion. Being able to question your own work is key to being a researcher—we have to be curious about others, ourselves, and our work.
In addition to learning from others, it is also imperative to learn how to give others feedback. This skill is helpful if you are interested in becoming a manager and something that will help you throughout your entire career.
User research reviews will help you work within a growth mindset, which means being open to trying new techniques, knowing it could fail, to learn how you can improve.
I like to structure my user research reviews as weekly recurring meetings in our calendars, usually about one hour long (so people are more likely to come). Within this format, typically 1-2 researchers can present their work, with each researcher having about thirty minutes to present and then get feedback.
A sign-up sheet gets circulated so people can sign-up for a slot a few weeks in advance. Not everyone should always attend the feedback session—only those who feel they can provide meaningful feedback to the presenters.
Since research is such a holistic process, with each step impacting the next, it is important to enable researchers to review any stage of the process and whenever they feel they need feedback.
The way we structure our research reviews is to get feedback at these separate stages:
Every feedback meeting should have guidelines to follow to ensure the feedback is as constructive as possible for the presenter. Critiques are focused on the work being presented, and never the researcher who is presenting the work.
All feedback about the work should come in the form of:
We structure each review with a recurring agenda, making it easier for people to present and for observers to know exactly what they are in for. I have even created templates for people in previous roles, so presenters remember to put all the relevant information.
The presenting researcher tells all the information they have for the project and then what exact area they are looking for feedback for. This can include:
The more information and context the presenting researcher can give the group, the easier it is for the observers to give feedback. In some instances, when a complex topic has been presented, the researcher might send a document for the group to pre-read before the meeting.
Once the introduction is done, the researcher will talk about exactly which area they need feedback on. The researcher who is presenting should take notes on the feedback, but there can also be a designated notetaker for each meeting—we like to rotate this responsibility!
The researcher presenting provides context on any of the following information they have:
Once the presenter has finished, the discussion begins. If the group is having a hard time starting the conversation, some guiding questions can help spark discussion:
During the research video review, the researcher plays back a session with a participant, and the observers watch for opportunities for improvement. Before starting, the researcher explains the context of the video in terms of the project's background, research goals/objectives, and can even present a quick discussion guide.
After this, the video starts. Ideally, each video should be no more than 5 minutes long. The researcher can present more than one video, especially if they are having trouble with particular questions in the same study.
The rest of the group watches the video and:
*Note: Pause to notice positive things the researcher did as well as ways to improve.
The researcher makes notes of what to:
The researcher presenting provides context on:
Once the analysis is presented, the discussion can start. Here are some guiding questions if the group gets stuck:
The researcher presenting provides context on:
*Note: The purpose here is not to run through your presentation with the team. It's to evaluate the deliverable at hand. Keep the conversation at a high level.
Once presented, the group will discuss the presentation and deliverables using some of these guiding questions:
The researcher presenting provides context on:
Once presented, the group will discuss the presentation and deliverables using some of these guiding questions:
Looking at their notes, the researcher decides three main things they want to implement differently and three things they want to keep doing in their next attempt at that stage of research.
The research review observers each share one thing they would like to change in their own research work in reaction to the review.
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.