For instance, I’m currently working on an experiment to make our verification process better. I’ve created different ways in which users can verify their account—using their face, credit card, or ID. These options aim to give users choices when logging in, while keeping their account safe.
But I wonder: Do my designs actually address what users want? Do they need so many ways of getting into their account? While being good at design is great, it can sometimes lead us in the wrong direction. Many designers of technology have a problem with starting to design based on guesses. When we assume we know what users want without checking, we could miss what they really need. That’s where user research comes in.
The User Research Dilemma
Even though things move quickly in technology, taking the time to understand users is crucial. Talking to them, watching how they use things, and analyzing user data helps us to create designs that meet users’ real needs. Conducting user research lets us uncover hidden clues to making better products. It is undeniable that the best way to avoid basing our designs on assumptions is to base them on user research. However, within the reality of technology’s high-intensity workflows and fast-path work environments, it is sometimes hard to make user research happen.
In UX classes or bootcamps, students of UX design learn how important user research is—that they should always test their designs and have proper interviews with users to understand what they need before designing and shipping a product. Before I became a real technology designer, this is what I was always told to do, too. But, as a UX designer working within technology companies’ fast-paced workflows, user research often gets delayed or is missing altogether from my workflows.
In fact, my team has only one UX researcher, who must work on every designer’s projects. Sometimes delivery schedules require that we skip testing or reduce the time we spend on research to meet a deadline. Every designer wants to make sure their product gets tested and perfected before they ship, but it is clearly impossible to make this happen consistently. After few design cycles in which this occurs, many UX designers become assumptions-based designers who iterate their designs based on what they believe rather than what they actually know about users. They get used to working in this way. So how can we focus on what’s most important, which is always key to what we need to think through?