Do we always know what our users really need?
The core differentiator of ‘Design Thinking’ as a process is how we empathize with users. We come across numerous cases where organizations are innovating by putting ‘users first’. But what does it mean to design for the user? Over the past few years of working as a design researcher at Turian Labs and interacting with multiple consumers, I realized how there is a thin line between ideating on ‘what the user wants’ vs ‘what the user actually needs’.
As designers, our fastest and the most common instinct during qualitative research is to ask the user ‘what kind of a product/service would they prefer.’ The next step is to write the answer down, turn them into insights saying ‘users need A/B/C features and begin with the ideation process. That’s where the first mistake happens.
When we usually ask the users what they want, their answers are limited by the immediate thoughts and ideas that occur to them at that moment. The solutions are biased towards the nature of the conversation the researcher has had with them so far. Users try to create solutions that would spark the interest of the researcher. They also tend to evaluate the feasibility of the solution based on their current knowledge before answering. Hence, asking them ‘what they want’ directly would not answer the purpose of the research. It might not be pointed at what they actually need. The same set of users who expressed liking for a particular feature might demonstrate dislike later.
“Some people say, ‘Give the customers what they want.’ But that’s not my approach. Our job is to figure out what they’re going to want before they do.”
— Steve Jobs
In order to create delight in the users’ minds, it is essential to understand ‘what do they actually need and why’ instead of stopping at a surface level of ‘what do they want’. For example, during an evaluatory UX research study, one of the users looked at the call to action button and said ‘I want this to be bigger and red in color.’ Instead of taking it a face value and suggesting changes like ‘Users preferred the button to be large and red in color,’ it is important to understand why they said that. Why did they want the button to be larger? Was there an issue of readability?
How can we question users in such a manner that we truly understand what they need? Here are three simple practices that can be deployed during qualitative user interviews to stumble on more ‘aha’ moments:
Construct a mental model on the go
Qualitative interviews are all about creating a mental model of the user based on micro-stories of their past experiences. As the interaction progresses, the researcher has to keep building on this model. Cross question or re-validate any response that seems to be inconsistent from the model that you build on the go. It is important to check why this kind of response came up and what triggered it.
Apart from just cross-checking, what also helps is to understand their overall lifestyle, their behavior outside of the topic of research. This helps in strengthening what the user would actually want. Start with open-ended questions on their hobbies, their routine, current products they are using. Build a network of their choices and lifestyle before jumping to the research topic. Any response that does not fit into the preference network needs cross-checking.
For example, while mapping the car buying behavior of a particular user segment, what would help is to try understanding their hobbies, weekday and weekend activities. If a user is known to try out new adventures and go off-roading a lot, the researcher can already build a mental model of his typical choices. In any instance, when the response does not correspond to this model, (like the user saying he would prefer a Sedan) it needs to be questioned further. This would ultimately help in discovering a unique behavior. It can so happen that the preference for a Sedan or ‘off-roading’ was for the perceived premium-ness attached to it. Hence, this builds a new understanding that the user values — ‘a feeling of premium-ness’ over just adventure.
2. Ask the right questions
It is essential to understand that users cannot guide the research beyond a point. The researcher cannot repeatedly ask questions on the ‘why’ aspect. Try understanding what they do, how they go about with their daily routines and tasks. This information will in turn lead to the reasoning behind why a user would need a particular feature. Refrain from asking questions like ‘What kind of features would you prefer?’ or ‘What colors can we provide for this screen?’ A researcher’s task is to uncover these answers through the users’ choices and motivations. Fast-forwarding to the solution phase during an interview would not lead to insights that highlight user needs. They usually end up being a non-feasible wish-list from the users’ end.
For example, if one has to understand the video calling behavior of working professionals, the questioning could be around: How their day goes by, what kind of video calls do they usually attend, the difficulties they have faced so far, their favorite video calling platforms, etc. The kind of questions to avoid would be, ‘If you had a magic wand, what video calling feature would you introduce? What are the features that have to be added to this app?’
This would lead to the users generating ideas within their immediate mind-frame, hence moving away from the initial research objective.
3. Use visual cues
Not all users can phrase sentences precisely on what they were thinking. In such cases, collaterals come to the rescue. These can be any visual cues, cards with keywords/sentences/images on them. But having a set of materials to look at, compare and prioritize always helps in understanding what the user actually needs. Projective techniques like card sorting, metaphor elicitation provide trigger points to talk about their past experiences. This in turn helps the researchers to cross-question and understand the users’ choices better. Visual cues can be used for interviews on any topic. Here are some common activities that can be done using visual collaterals:
Mutually exclusive pictures are shown to the users to understand what they can relate with the most. A set of features are written on cards and the users can prioritize these cards from the ‘most important’ to ‘least important.’ Pictures of the product being tested can be shown to users to understand what they associate these images with.
In order to understand the aesthetic preferences of a certain group of users, the team used 4–5 images of home interiors from different style palettes. The users were asked to pick a picture that they associated the most with. Once they chose a picture, the follow-up questions were around the elements they liked in the picture and the reasons why they chose that picture. This helped reduce the cognitive load of the user to articulate his/her preferences.
To sum up, qualitative research is an empowering tool for deciding what to do next. The real crux lies in actually understanding the user, beyond just what they articulate as their needs. Not everything they say is actionable insight. A combination of simple techniques like cross-questioning, using visual collaterals during user interactions can aid in exploring the underlying behavior and crafting meaningful solutions.
