In the last few days, I've been told by UX professionals that we wouldn't want our organizations to be research-driven. They say being research-driven would make us "scientific" and "overly analytical" and wouldn't allow for creativity.
To me, being research-centric doesn't imply being "overly analytical." Nor does it prevent creativity.
To me, being research-centric means that if you think customers will love the new, expensive feature you want to build, it's because you've met customers who want that feature, and you know exactly how to build it because you've studied the problem that feature will solve.
Research-centric means you stop guessing a feature will be well-received just because you have a hunch.
Research-centric means that your creative efforts all go to solving problems you've studied in depth instead of guessing what the problem is.
Research-centric means the design team no longer has to argue that their ideas are good because the research shows that customers need their designs. Instead, it means that they no longer spend time arguing with others who came up with their own solutions without understanding the customer's problem at all.
There is no tension between creativity and research. Research only improves creativity because it focuses the designer on the real problems of customers, not imaginary ones that take the organization down the wrong path.
I'm curious how we've gotten to a point where so many UX people have no idea what actual research is.
#ux #design #research #uxresearch #uxdesign #uxleadership