Writing
Writing
5 min read
Approach
Discovery
User Research
Jan 25, 2025
A blended and rapid user research approach to amplify outcomes
Cue daydreaming: having better design output, extending designs impact and having stakeholder buy-in. A follow up article from a talk I gave at the UXR Meetup in Dubai.
Too often, designers and researchers face a frustrating reality: stakeholders don't fully understand human-centered design, nor their own customers, yet they don't provide enough budget and dismiss research as a “nice-to-have.” Undervaluing its role in shaping impactful designs. Instead of saying, “Let’s talk to users,” we’re constantly battling their gut instincts—and trying to prevent those instincts from sabotaging our work.
Skipping foundational research may feel like a time-saver now, but it paves the way for costly redesigns later. So, what if we flipped the script? What if foundational research wasn’t a chore to defend but an integral part of the design process, baked right into the workflow? And what if we blurred the lines between research and design, becoming one unstoppable, insight-driven team? It’s time to stop waiting for stakeholders to see the light and start making it impossible for them not to.
The constant struggle for getting buy-in for foundational research
The “shortcut syndrome”: Stakeholders often see foundational research as an indulgence when deadlines loom. Why spend weeks on research when we need designs now?
Abstract ROI: Foundational insights can feel intangible. It’s hard to explain how understanding a user's pain point today will save money in six months.
The curse of the "expert stakeholder": Everyone thinks they know the user because they use the product—except their “user” is usually an outdated persona or, worse, themselves.
Let’s play devil’s advocate:
"But foundational research takes too long!"
Not true. When integrated into the design process, research can be fast, iterative, and actionable. Think less "academic thesis," more "real-time insights."
"Why not just test after launch?"
Because cleaning up after a failed launch is way more expensive than getting it right the first time. Foundational research reduces risk by identifying issues before they become expensive mistakes.
The Blended Research approach
It's simply, the combination of Foundational and Evaluative research within the same session. With this combination you are planting the initial seeds. You are gaining that little bit more of understanding of the users, which is going to help you get that little bit more buy-in you need to do the bigger, better, (bad-er?) projects.
Part 1: Starts with Foundational (kind of warm up questions I guess)
It's extending the session a little bit longer than 30 minutes, maybe 45. Taking the first max 20 minutes to dig into more foundational topics. Maybe you have a backlog of items that are related to this scope that you want to understand more of. Think motivations, goals, current experience, you name it. Maximise the time with the participants.
Part 2: Continue with Evaluative
This is where your designs get ripped apart, hey at least it's by a user and not a stakeholder. Use the remaining 25 min for the concept test. Those beautiful designs you spent so many hours meticulously detailing and thinking about. You don't have to test every single thing you designed. Pick the ones most crucial for the phase you are at, and just enough answers you need to continue moving forward.
With a blended research approach as your understanding continues to grow, you're building trust with the stakeholder because you can demonstrate a certain expertise around the topic or problem space. This is the key enabler to building the trust with them and getting the buy-in for the larger projects you want to work on.
Here's how to take this further with The R.I.T.E Interviews:
If someone hits a pothole, fix it. And that's what the Rapid Iterative Testing and Evaluation stands for.
Take the blended approach
See above.
Plan for 2-3 rounds of 1-5 interviews
Make sure to plan at least 2-3 each day in a week. Each session takes about 45 minutes. This ensures you have the time to test, debrief and iterate in between.
Blur the lines between research and design
Embed research into the product process, creating shared ownership of insights and outcomes. Have designers and researchers exchange roles, it's ok for a designer to run an interview, or for a researcher to build a prototype.
If you identify a key problem, fix immediately
Test early, test often. The faster you find flaws, the quicker you can fix them. Use every failure as a springboard for improvement.
The whole point of the rapid approach is to iterate whenever it makes sense. Sometimes after one single session, sometimes after a round of two or three sessions. Simply this is going to enable you to explore a multitude of design concepts & solutions, because you drop what isn't working and expand on what is working.
Look left, right, up, down
Don't just single out your screens. The user isn't just going to look at your in the context of their experience. They're coming from somewhere and going somewhere.
And that's how we changed the game (at least for that project) to:
Achieve a high design output
Blur the lines between research and design. What if foundational and evaluative research weren’t separate phases? Imagine a world where user interviews and usability tests happen in tandem with design iterations—a constant feedback loop that evolves your designs whenever you see that pot hole.
Extend your impact beyond your team
Design and research within the broader context of use, not just within the silo of your scope. The user doesn't always just see your screen first. They've come from somewhere, are doing something, are going somewhere.
What if we normalized showing our research in progress? Letting stakeholders see the missteps, new nuggets of knowlegde or concepts discarded, builds trust and makes successes feel earned.
Bonus: It’s way more fun than a polished PowerPoint.
Obtain stakeholder buy-in
Stop presenting research as optional. Bake research part of the design DNA. The same way we have rough design files, we can have rough research files. Combine foundational interviews with real-time concept testing. Fix the potholes (your concepts) as you’re driving, not after your users constantly hit a wall.
By blending roles and the research approach, embracing collaboration and less meticulous analysis, and designing with insights—not guesses—you don’t just create better products. You create processes that stakeholders trust, teams that thrive, and users who feel seen.
Try it out and let me know how it works out for you.
