the growth of user research

a grad student on an ethnography email list i’m following just asked this question:

The practice of using ethnographic methods in business has been around for decades. However, the use of this type of researcher has increased greatly over the past 20 years. Many of the members of this list have been part of that history. In your opinion, based on what you have seen or experienced directly, what have been the events/people which/who have propelled the field forward or have had far-reaching impacts? Alternatively, what do you see as being important in the history of this work?

I’m sure there are people and specific events that have had far-reaching impacts, but really what I’ve noticed is a slow march toward inclusion and incorporation into the development process.

I’m not sure what it’s like at most large companies, but based on my few years working with smaller companies, i have some opinion as to how the value of research generally has increased. most of this relates to user research for design and user testing, as opposed to a roll more strictly defined as ethnography, because of the size of my clients. but perhaps my view is also generally useful. this is what i’ve seen (continued below the fold).

As development teams get exposed to user research and start to see their blind spots then they get more excited about incorporating research into their design processes. But before that it is an abstract idea for them or something they might not appreciate at all. Then as they do more research, their appreciation grows to a certain point where they feel they’ve covered some bases.

This is most notable when they have a strong blind-spot bias. For example, this happens if the development team designs a product for mass-market consumers while forgetting that they do not think in the same ways or learn in the same ways as mass-market consumers. The user testing then poignantly uncovers the bias and the team sees immediate value in the research or testing.

I’m not convinced yet though that just exposing a product team to research methods - with a sudden appreciation that it produces - is sufficient for planting it firmly into the company design process. The appreciation grows only to a certain point.

I’ve only seen research plant firmly in organizations where upper management has grown up with and really appreciated research in a design cycle. Further, the design function in the company must be given enough political weight and support in the organization. Without the former appreciation, the management does not allocate sufficient budget or schedule time or lead time for research in the process. Without the latter organizational support for design, the research efforts continually fall victim to the competing goals of marketing and engineering functions. So for design and best practice research methods to provide a lasting benefit to a development organization, in my experience, what’s needed is to hire company executives that value the discipline already and who promote the design function at an organization level. Promoting at an organizational level means hiring a director of design or v.p. of design or similar on par with peer engineering and marketing functions. Otherwise the research provides some benefit but it is more often marginalized.

If you're new here, thanks for visiting! Please subscribe to my RSS feed and consider visiting my design-related blog and my meditation-related blog.