Listening Beyond the Lab

Researchers are skilled in many hard-to-see ways. Their practices, when applied to a business problem, drive empathy and align products with the humans they intend to serve. Frequently the skillset is described in its ends as opposed to its means; "empathy" is the watchword for the field and becomes what UXRs are "good at."

Ximena Vengoechea is one such UXR who became increasingly interested in one critical aspect of being a shepherd of user-centered insights: listening. From interview and focus group sessions to stakeholder shareouts and collaboration workshops, listening is a primary way to "do" the work of translating human-centered data into action. Ximena got her start in product, which offered her a chance to conduct user research sessions, often partnering with designers. It was those granular, tactical, immediate moments that sparked her curiosity into UX.

That spark took her to organizations like Twitter, LinkedIn, and Pinterest, where she honed her craft, mentored junior folks, and built teams around the tenet of empathy translation for business impact. Along the way Ximena began to notice how core UXR skills translated to non-UXR contexts.

The effects of 2020—the loneliness, alienation, distance, and misunderstanding—created an urgency for Ximena to start writing down and expanding her observations. Connection, empathy, idea translation, all the hallmarks of human-centered design and research were in dire need for so many. Ximena decided to write a book for a broad audience, elucidating the importance of listening. She sat down (virtually) for a discussion about the book—Listen Like you Mean it—and listening's power beyond a user session.

dscout: Listening is a core skill for human-centered research, but that criticality can make it seem innate. Yet your book is focused on honing and growing that skill.

Ximena: There's an assumption that a researcher is just good at their job because they're just naturally like that.

It's true in that there are certain qualities that good listeners share like empathy, curiosity, humility, and some of us have more of those qualities than others naturally do. But these qualities can also be learned. You can learn how to be more curious, even if it's a topic that you're not interested in. We may be researching something about which we know very little but we find a way to stay curious.

I think the same can be said of empathy and humility: there are ways to dial these up in conversation and go a little bit deeper. It's like public speaking; we know you can practice specific techniques, yet we don't often talk about listening in the same way. That's some of what I'm trying to do with the book—to show how you can acquire some of those skills and put them into practice and demystify listening a little bit in the process.

I'm suggesting we use the same techniques we use in a lab setting to understand participants and inform a product outside of the lab, to extract insights about a person to help you understand them better and build a better connection with them.

Just as we coach our participants and create the space for openness, we can create a practice that promotes better listening in our work.

Our remote-first world is foregrounding the importance of listening and attention. How do you frame listening within this mediated space many UXRs are in?

The pandemic resulted in a quick move to online conversations and the default has been to connect remotely with video on. That can be useful, but also exhausting. Rather than default to a video call, it’s useful to think about when you need video and when you might get more out of a phone call instead.

You can catch a lot of emotion with just audio. You can hear people smile through the phone. You can hear people thinking through the phone. There are certain kinds of conversations too, that a lot of people feel more free or do better thinking not in front of a screen, or while walking. I think it's worth thinking about when which format makes sense.

Getting creative in this way can open the space for the kind of data good listening brings. For example, if seeing a participant's home is important but they aren’t comfortable giving you a video tour during your session, could they send a couple snapshots so that you have a sense of their environment? Ask them to send you a picture of their favorite spot in the house, or their most relaxing corner of the house. You can still get visual and auditory information even if it's not a straight video call.

Our remote-first world is foregrounding the importance of listening and attention. How do you frame listening within this mediated space many UXRs are in?

The pandemic resulted in a quick move to online conversations and the default has been to connect remotely with video on. That can be useful, but also exhausting. Rather than default to a video call, it’s useful to think about when you need video and when you might get more out of a phone call instead.

You can catch a lot of emotion with just audio. You can hear people smile through the phone. You can hear people thinking through the phone. There are certain kinds of conversations too, that a lot of people feel more free or do better thinking not in front of a screen, or while walking. I think it's worth thinking about when which format makes sense.

Getting creative in this way can open the space for the kind of data good listening brings. For example, if seeing a participant's home is important but they aren’t comfortable giving you a video tour during your session, could they send a couple snapshots so that you have a sense of their environment? Ask them to send you a picture of their favorite spot in the house, or their most relaxing corner of the house. You can still get visual and auditory information even if it's not a straight video call.

Could you describe an "Aha!" moment experienced during your research?

We often think, especially when we're meeting new people, that the goal is to seem interesting so that they'll be drawn into us. What research actually shows is that people who demonstrate curiosity are perceived to be more interesting and likable. So, don't focus so much on being interesting so much as being interested in the other person.

And I think this is something that is baked into the research practice. You're constantly getting curious, you're asking more, you want to go deeper and the same can be applied in our everyday conversations. It's just harder because if you're conducting a study, you have a really clear goal and objective—it's your job. In an everyday conversation it's very easy for us to tune out and say, "Oh, I'm not really interested in that topic." or I'm sort of half here, but I'm half elsewhere thinking about what else I need to get done. Remember to focus on that curiosity. Try to get curious about at least one aspect of the topic at hand; that will make conversations much more fulfilling for both parties.

Are there questions UXRs can begin weaving into their session to make the space for listening? Silence and pauses play a role in the practice you describe.

I think we're often taught that silence in conversation is "awkward" so we should avoid it. And as a result we tend to rush in: we change the topic or we blab on about ourselves. But sometimes that silence is a gift—it's just a sign that the person is still processing, that they're thinking through something or that there's more to be said. And honestly, even if they're not, it's okay to just sit in silence together. More often than not however, it does lead to a richer conversation. It's only uncomfortable because we don't get very much practice in it.

Simply witnessing someone's experience and emotions and not providing advice or saying, "It's going to be okay," if someone feels upset feels uncomfortable to a lot of us, and we don't do it very often. When we can bring that into a conversation it creates this level of intimacy and trust between you and the other person. If you've ever been on the receiving end of that, then you know how good it feels; when someone creates that space for you, the tenor of the conversation is totally different and you feel seen and understood by the other person.

So in practice, if someone says, "I don't know how I feel about this..." then you might say, "Because…?" or "You feel that way because...?" It's very small and it doesn't sound like a question, but you're just offering them a little more space to finish the thought. We can often hear when someone’s thought is incomplete or there's more to learn. And If you can practice pausing, being still, and providing a little bit of encouragement with these kinds of subtle questions, folks will often feel comfortable and ready to offer more context.

The applicability of listening is a core tenet of the book. For leaders of organizations who want to create a listening culture, what might they do?

I'd emphasize the value and importance of modeling the behaviors that you wish to see. I think especially when you look at a team's culture, and ask where is that coming from? Well, it's coming in large part from you as the leader. Maybe it emerged organically and you're happy with it. However leaving the outcome to chance also leaves the opportunity for you to be unhappy with the culture and for it not to be one that promotes the values important to the group.

If the intention is to create a culture where listening is valued, then you have to demonstrate that—you have to practice what you preach. It's not enough to just say, "Hey, you should do this." It's also important to think about the actions or behaviors that get rewarded in a culture. If you really value something, model it, reinforce it, and reward it; whatever "rewarding" means to you, your team, or your organization. Maybe it's a shout out, maybe it's a thank you, maybe it's in their performance review. That’s what helps reinforce it. It's saying, "Hey, when you do this behavior, I see you, I appreciate you, I want you to do more of that." The way we communicate that becomes important for not just putting the scaffolding in place for that behavior, but making sure that it's strong and that that foundation doesn't crumble.

I'm told creating art can change the artist. Did creating this book change you?

What was interesting about taking on this project is that consciously I was always thinking of the reader as someone else, and how they could apply these tactics in their own lives and improve the relationships in their own lives. It was very outward-thinking. But really, throughout the whole process I was on some level thinking of myself, too—I think this is probably pretty common for writers—and I don't think I knew how personal of a project it was until the end, where I realized that this is a book that only I could've written. Not the topic of listening, but my sensibilities, the moments where I notice listening is or isn't happening, what I've tuned into. Those are all really personal.

That was a big learning moment for me: this book is as much a guide to listening as it is a guide to me as a person and the things that matter to me, which are empathy, care, and connection.

The book is full of illustrations that you drew. Why was it important to have a literal hand in that?

I think of images and illustrations as most useful for explaining a concept or furthering an idea. Through the writing process, I found moments where I could take an idea that I'd spent a couple of pages on and neatly sum it up in an image, or introduce an idea through an image. The book has just shy of 100 illustrations in it, which is much more than I initially set out to do

People learn and consume ideas and remember ideas differently. Some people are great with the written word and for others it's much more effective with images. In the book I've got text, bullet points and scripts, tables, and images. There's a lot of information and it can be consumed in many different ways. I'm trying to create a whole with these component parts that all complement each other.