AR2021- Mission: Keep Talent in Research Roles (Rebecca Buck, Forge Studio)

—> I’m here on a mission to keep more people in research
—> We all know technology influences so much in the world
  • Digital products we use affect us deeply
—> Whenever people make decisions about technology we want researchers in room to see broader social influence, and help executives understand what the design can do
—> I’m seeing the influence of UX research grow, but the influx of people in UX research still has people struggling to find their footing

 

 

—> The most common frustration people have is how under-utilized they feel
  • PhD candidate in public policy was bored to tears with running the same survey over and over

 

—> People also feel they have crummy relationship with manager, since its more likely for researchers to report to someone who doesn’t know what person should be doing

 

—>  People also come from other disciplines, but feel so disrespected in their role that they leave UX research entirely
—> Today’s talks is about how to prevent this sense of being forced out from UX research from occurring

 

 

—> So I want to talk about navigating a UXR
  • It’s a journey rather than a ladder

 

 

—> I have struggled with title of researcher, and have had no clue on how to get hired as a researcher
  • Applied through friends, but heard back that departments couldn’t see where I fit in
—> I eventually landed jobs, worked on exciting companies, with great proejects
  • Started getting critique that I wasn’t a real researcher
—> I eventually dropped the research title entirely, and didn’t see enough career options as researcher in general
  • Didn’t know people who moved from IC research to product, CEO roles
—> Today, my agency comes in as a SWAT team, that helps clients achieve great goals

 

 

—> So who is qualified to do the work? What does it look like?
  • Answer is “It depends” on company and how you define the role
  • The smaller the company, the less defined the role
—> Without rules hard to assess if someone is a fit for the role

 

—> Fit does get bad reputation as euphemism for discrimination
  • But hiring manager and candidates are trying to assess if they will fit within role

 

 

—> Think of three broad backgrounds for UXR
  • PhD Programs (Psychology, Sociology, etc.)
  • Design Thinking (Agency background)
  • Adjacent Roles (Started Somewhere else) and moved into UXR)
—> Already a pretty narrow candidate pool, since field barely existed several years ago
  • So backgrounds listed are not only careers that lead to UXR
  • And people don’t need training in PhD to succeed

 

 

— For PhD program graduates:
—> Strengths: Rigor and intellectual horsepower
—> Struggle: There’s comparatively little rigor and time in industry, and its hard apply program knowledge in industry
—> Bias: Lack of context for process of software design, and a  lack of empathy for speed/pressure people are under

 

—> For Design Thinking applicants:
—> Strengths:  Bring business acumen, storytelling strategy
—> Struggle: Obsessed with artifacts, in sales mode, and pre-defining solution
—> Bias: Weak when working data, and quantitative analysis

 

—> For Adjacent Roles
—> Strength: Know how business operates, and bravery in making shift
—> Struggle: Without notion of tribe behind them, as they are learning job on the job, and trying to mimic what others are doing
—> Bias: Don’t know what they don’t know

 

—> So let’s consider the position of research related to scrum teams
  • Agile was described to me as people trying to lay tracks for a train while train is moving
—> I loved metaphor and ran with it

 

—> Where is UXR relative to the “train”?
  • Closest are track builders who are working with product teams, and steering as it’s built
  • Above everything  there are look-outs like managers, project leads to see what’s ahead and clear out a path
  • Scouts: People who find location for next train station, and working on defining features a quarter or two out
  • Explorers: People sent out to explore new territories for the company and in larger companies.
—> Large companies have roles for all these roles, and corresponding time horizons
—> Small companies must start with one role, and build from there

 

—> The following framework is used for team-health surveys, where people draw and explain where they work today, and where they want to work ideally
—> It’s important to note that one person’s lack of fit is another person’s ideal.
  • If things don’t feel quite right for you, think of framing of where you are working and where you want to spend your time

 

 

—> Also remember that an org structure is flexible and always evolving
  • You can shift from external advisor to embedding in teams
  • Structures can change so much, about right way to approach things, and timelines you like
—> There are many dimensions to assigning fit

 

—> Also, change the question of “Am I a fit?” To what a product-market could look like in your situation.
  • This step can help de-personalize the situation and help you think what fit might mean for you

 

 

 

—> Think how you can fit within roles i.e. strengths you can leverage, or blindspots you have
  • You can change team dynamics in many ways

 

—> Consider the questions above to figure out product-market fit

 

 

—> Use product market fit language to depersonalize a situation, and negotiate boundaries you have differently

 

 

—> “Good UX research” assumes you have made you way on field, on team, are looking to see if  your work is good.
  • This requires syncing your definition of “good” with that of your colleagues

 

 

—> So I’ll tell you a story.
—> There were two researchers at big company, Jess and Sam. Sam was frustrated with Jess for using too many UX research resources.
—> Sam confronted Jess about this, and asked Jess what the role of her UX research study was
  • Jess told Sam that the company stakeholders didn’t value research, so Sam was trying to expose stakeholders to fifty users in a single month
  • Through running these sessions, stakeholders were starting to ask better questions about their users
—> The lesson? Conversations on quality UX research depend on a shared definition of what ‘quality’ means.
  • Jess needed to build relationships with project stakeholders
  • Sam needed to get quality data

 

—> We also need to recognized though that life is about trade-offs, even with a shared language of what “quality” means
—> The preceding story is an example of managing trade-offs against each other
  • Jess needed to show stakeholders  that they didn’t understand the users, and that took priority over things like “What to build”

 

 

—> Next, meet people where they are at. Step back and get a lay of the land for what needs to be done
—> I think about a meeting where product manager told me they had a metaphorical gun to their head, and needed to get the project done as quick as possible
  • He felt frustrated in that he expected iteration and wanted to skip experimentation and focus on shipping the product
—> When scoping own work, frame conversations around
  • What resources are available?
  • What constraints are we under?

 

 

—> So get curious about what quality means in a specific context, and expand your definition of quality

 

 

—> Work-related burnout is a bigger and bigger problem in tech

 

—> If you are wondering if you are experiencing burnout. Here’s a hint:
  • If your recreational reading involves topics like hostage negotiation, you are either experiencing burnout or having more work related conflict than is desired

 

 

—> Consider working with a coach, or a program like Design Dept

 

 

—> In summary, enjoy your journey
—> For anyone with UX identity crisis, it’s totally normal to have it
  • I learned I identify as researcher, translator, story-teller, and bridge-builder
—> I hope the stories provided move you from self-doubt to assessing ways where disconnect might be, and focus on learning and enjoying your journey in UX research.

 

 

Q&A
  1. Any advice for handling the “shiny object” syndrome companies have?
A: Metrics. Anything to quantify the customer goals
  1. What if our research is the thing that draws scorn? If our data shows we’re being asked to build the wrong thing? What steps do you take to minimize the potential damage to users? Where do you draw boundaries personally?
A: Depends on seniority, and where people are in the design process
–> In working with an executive, I raised concerns about product, but he said getting product out was a company priority
  • So choose your battles
  1. How do you balance your leadership style and values with what clients might expect research to be? What are the boundaries you set for yourself when making the tradeoffs you mentioned?
A: Many way to think about fit and tradeoffs.
  • Set expectations and pointing out largest risks.
—> Everything is easier when you have trust
  1. How can you advocate for your team to have a flexible structure? (ex: embedded product teams vs. external advisors)
A:  Depends on org chart, trust and autonomy
—> Can point to case studies as prior example, and hope people can leverage it
  1. How might we encourage our product team to do the exercise to evaluate where we are/wanna be?
A:  Delicate, as depends on trust, and having conversation in a safe-space
—> If not safe, outcome won’t be good.
  • Start seeding idea and have conversation with people.
  • Take temperature and see if people are ready for idea