Efficient Research: Maximizing the ROI of Understanding Your Customers

What is UX research? 🤔

‍

User experience (UX) research, or user research as it’s commonly referred to, is an important part of the product design process. Primarily, UX research involves using different research methods to gather information about how your users interact with your product. It is an essential part of developing, building and launching a product that truly meets the requirements of your users. 

‍

UX research is essential at all stages of a products' life cycle:

‍

1. Planning
2. Building
3. Introduction
4. Growth & Maturity

‍

While there is no one single time to conduct UX research it is best-practice to continuously gather information throughout the lifetime of your product. The good news is many of the UX research methods do not fit just one phase either, and can (and should) be used repeatedly. After all, there are always new pieces of functionality to test and new insights to discover. We introduce you to best-practice UX research methods for each lifecycle phase of your product.

‍

‍

‍

1. Product planning phase 🗓️

‍

While the planning phase it is about creating a product that fits your organization, your organization’s needs and meeting a gap in the market it’s also about meeting the needs, desires and requirements of your users. Through UX research you’ll learn which features are necessary to be aligned with your users. And of course, user research lets you test your UX design before you build, saving you time and money.

‍

‍

Qualitative Research Methods

‍

Usability Testing - Observational

‍

One of the best ways to learn about your users and how they interact with your product is to observe them in their own environment. Watch how they accomplish tasks, the order they do things, what frustrates them, and what makes the task easier and/or more enjoyable for your subject. The data can be collated to inform the usability of your product, improving intuitive design, and what resonates with users.

‍

Competitive Analysis

‍

Reviewing products already in the market can be a great start to the planning process. Why are your competitors’ products successful and how well do they behave for users. Learn from their successes, and even better build on where they may not be performing the best and find your niche in the market.

‍

‍

Quantitative Research Methods

‍

Surveys and Questionnaires

‍

Surveys are useful for collecting feedback or understanding attitudes. You can use the learnings from your survey of a subset of users to draw conclusions about a larger population of users.

‍

There are two types of survey questions:
‍

Closed questions are designed to capture quantitative information. Instead of asking users to write out answers, these questions often use multi-choice answers.

‍

Open questions are designed to capture qualitative information such as motivations and context.  Typically, these questions require users to write out an answer in a text field.

‍

‍

‍

2. Product building phase 🧱

‍

Once you've completed your product planning research, you’re ready to begin the build phase for your product. User research studies undertaken during the build phase enable you to validate the UX team’s deliverables before investing in the technical development.

‍

‍

Qualitative Research Methods

‍

Focus groups

‍

Generally involve 5-10 participants and include demographically similar individuals. The study is set up so that members of the group can interact with one another and can be carried out in person or remotely.
‍

‍
Besides learning about the participants’ impressions and perceptions of your product, focus group findings also include what users believe to be a product’s most important features, problems they might encounter while using the product, as well as their experiences with other products, both good and bad.

‍

‍

Quantitative Research Methods

‍

Card sorting gives insight into how users think. Tools like card sorting reveal where your users expect to find certain information or complete specific tasks. This is especially useful for products with complex or multiple navigations and contributes to the creation of an intuitive information architecture and user experience.

‍

Tree testing gives insight into where users expect to find things and where they’re getting lost within your product. Tools like tree testing help you test your information architecture.
Card sorting and tree testing are often used together. Depending on the purpose of your research and where you are at with your product, they can provide a fully rounded view of your information architecture.

‍

‍

‍

3. Product introduction phase 📦

‍

You’ve launched your product, wahoo! And you’re ready for your first real life, real time users. Now it’s time to optimize your product experience. To do this, you’ll need to understand how your new users actually use your product.

‍

‍

Qualitative Research Methods

‍

Usability testing involves testing a product with users. Typically it involves observing users as they try to follow and complete a series of tasks. As a result you can evaluate if the design is intuitive and if there are any usability problems.

‍

User Interviews - A user interview is designed to get a deeper understanding of a particular topic. Unlike a usability test, where you’re more likely to be focused on how people use your product, a user interview is a guided conversation aimed at better understanding your users. This means you’ll be capturing details like their background, pain points, goals and motivations.

‍

‍

Quantitative Research Methods

‍

A/B Testing is a way to compare two versions of a design in order to work out which is more effective. It’s typically used to test two versions of the same webpage, for example, using a different headline, image or call to action to see which one converts more effectively. This method offers a way to validate smaller design choices where you might not have the data to make an informed decision, like the color of a button or the layout of a particular image.

‍

Flick-click testing shows you where people click first when trying to complete a task on a website. In most cases, first-click testing is performed on a very simple wireframe of a website, but it can also be carried out on a live website using a tool like first-time clicking.

‍

‍

‍

4. Growth and maturity phase 🪴

‍

If you’ve reached the growth stage, fantastic news! You’ve built a great product that’s been embraced by your users. Next on your to-do list is growing your product by increasing your user base and then eventually reaching maturity and making a profit on your hard work.

‍

Growing your product involves building new or advanced features to satisfy specific customer segments. As you plan and build these enhancements, go through the same research and testing process you used to create the first release. The same holds true for enhancements as well as a new product build — user research ensures you’re building the right thing in the best way for your customers.

‍

‍

Qualitative research methods

‍

User interviews will focus on how your product is working or if it’s missing any features, enriching your knowledge about your product and users.

‍

It allows you to test your current features, discover new possibilities for additional features and think about discarding  existing ones. If your customers aren’t using certain features, it might be time to stop supporting them to reduce costs and help you grow your profits during the maturity stage.

‍

‍

Quantitative research methods

‍

Surveys and questionnaires can help gather information around which features will work best for your product, enhancing and improving the user experience. 

‍

A/B testing during growth and maturity occurs within your sales and onboarding processes. Making sure you have a smooth onboarding process increases your conversion rate and reduces wasted spend — improving your bottom line.

‍

‍

‍

Wrap up 🌮

‍

UX research testing throughout the lifecycle of your product helps you continuously evolve and develop a product that responds to what really matters - your users.

‍

Talking to, testing, and knowing your users will allow you to push your product in ways that make sense with the data to back up decisions. Go forth and create the product that meets your organizations needs by delivering the very best user experience for your users.

Introduction

‍

User research is invaluable, but in fast-paced environments, researchers often struggle with tight deadlines, limited resources, and the need to prove their impact. In our recent UX Insider webinar, Weidan Li, Senior UX Researcher at Seek, shared insights on Efficient Research—an approach that optimizes Speed, Quality, and Impact to maximize the return on investment (ROI) of understanding customers.

‍

At the heart of this approach is the Efficient Research Framework, which balances these three critical factors:

• Speed – Conducting research quickly without sacrificing key insights.
• Quality – Ensuring rigor and reliability in findings.
• Impact – Making sure research leads to meaningful business and product changes.

‍

Within this framework, Weidan outlined nine tactics that help UX researchers work more effectively. Let’s dive in.

‍

‍

1. Time Allocation: Invest in What Matters Most

‍

Not all research requires the same level of depth. Efficient researchers prioritize their time by categorizing projects based on urgency and impact:

• High-stakes decisions (e.g., launching a new product) require deep research.
• Routine optimizations (e.g., tweaking UI elements) can rely on quick testing methods.
• Low-impact changes may not need research at all.

‍

By allocating time wisely, researchers can avoid spending weeks on minor issues while ensuring critical decisions are well-informed.

‍

‍

2. Assistance of AI: Let Technology Handle the Heavy Lifting

‍

AI is transforming UX research, enabling faster and more scalable insights. Weidan suggests using AI to:

• Automate data analysis – AI can quickly analyze survey responses, transcripts, and usability test results.
• Generate research summaries – Tools like ChatGPT can help synthesize findings into digestible insights.
• Speed up recruitment – AI-powered platforms can help find and screen participants efficiently.

‍

While AI can’t replace human judgment, it can free up researchers to focus on higher-value tasks like interpreting results and influencing strategy.

‍

‍

3. Collaboration: Make Research a Team Sport

‍

Research has a greater impact when it’s embedded into the product development process. Weidan emphasizes:

• Co-creating research plans with designers, PMs, and engineers to align on priorities.
• Involving stakeholders in synthesis sessions so insights don’t sit in a report.
• Encouraging non-researchers to run lightweight studies, such as A/B tests or quick usability checks.

‍

When research is shared and collaborative, it leads to faster adoption of insights and stronger decision-making.

‍

‍

4. Prioritization: Focus on the Right Questions

‍

With limited resources, researchers must choose their battles wisely. Weidan recommends using a prioritization framework to assess:

• Business impact – Will this research influence a high-stakes decision?
• User impact – Does it address a major pain point?
• Feasibility – Can we conduct this research quickly and effectively?

‍

By filtering out low-priority projects, researchers can avoid research for research’s sake and focus on what truly drives change.

‍

‍

5. Depth of Understanding: Go Beyond Surface-Level Insights

‍

Speed is important, but efficient research isn’t about cutting corners. Weidan stresses that even quick studies should provide a deep understanding of users by:

• Asking why, not just what – Observing behavior is useful, but uncovering motivations is key.
• Using triangulation – Combining methods (e.g., usability tests + surveys) to validate findings.
• Revisiting past research – Leveraging existing insights instead of starting from scratch.

‍

Balancing speed with depth ensures research is not just fast, but meaningful.

‍

‍

6. Anticipation: Stay Ahead of Research Needs

‍

Proactive researchers don’t wait for stakeholders to request studies—they anticipate needs and set up research ahead of time. This means:

• Building a research roadmap that aligns with upcoming product decisions.
• Running continuous discovery research so teams have a backlog of insights to pull from.
• Creating self-serve research repositories where teams can find relevant past studies.

‍

By anticipating research needs, UX teams can reduce last-minute requests and deliver insights exactly when they’re needed.

‍

‍

7. Justification of Methodology: Explain Why Your Approach Works

‍

Stakeholders may question research methods, especially when they seem time-consuming or expensive. Weidan highlights the importance of educating teams on why specific methods are used:

• Clearly explain why qualitative research is needed when stakeholders push for just numbers.
• Show real-world examples of how past research has led to business success.
• Provide a trade-off analysis (e.g., “This method is faster but provides less depth”) to help teams make informed choices.

‍

A well-justified approach ensures research is respected and acted upon.

‍

‍

8. Individual Engagement: Tailor Research Communication to Your Audience

‍

Not all stakeholders consume research the same way. Weidan recommends adapting insights to fit different audiences:

• Executives – Focus on high-level impact and key takeaways.
• Product teams – Provide actionable recommendations tied to specific features.
• Designers & Engineers – Share usability findings with video clips or screenshots.

‍

By delivering insights in the right format, researchers increase the likelihood of stakeholder buy-in and action.

‍

‍

9. Business Actions: Ensure Research Leads to Real Change

‍

The ultimate goal of research is not just understanding users—but driving business decisions. To ensure research leads to action:

• Follow up on implementation – Track whether teams apply the insights.
• Tie findings to key metrics – Show how research affects conversion rates, retention, or engagement.
• Advocate for iterative research – Encourage teams to re-test and refine based on new data.

‍

Research is most valuable when it translates into real business outcomes.

‍

‍

Final Thoughts: Research That Moves the Needle

‍

Efficient research is not just about doing more, faster—it’s about balancing speed, quality, and impact to maximize its influence. Weidan’s nine tactics help UX researchers work smarter by:

‍
✔️  Prioritizing high-impact work
✔️  Leveraging AI and collaboration
✔️  Communicating research in a way that drives action

‍

By adopting these strategies, UX teams can ensure their research is not just insightful, but transformational.

‍

‍

Watch the full webinar here

‍

In UX research we are told again and again that to ensure truly user-centered design, it’s important to test ideas with real users as early as possible. There are many benefits that come from introducing the voice of the people you are designing for in the early stages of the design process. The more feedback you have to work with, the more you can inform your design to align with real needs and expectations. In turn, this leads to better experiences that are more likely to succeed in the real world.It is not surprising then that paper prototypes have become a popular tool used among researchers. They allow ideas to be tested as they emerge, and can inform initial designs before putting in the hard yards of building the real thing. It would seem that they’re almost a no-brainer for researchers, but just like anything out there, along with all the praise, they have also received a fair share of criticism, so let’s explore paper prototypes a little further.

‍

What’s a paper prototype anyway? 🧐📖

‍

Paper prototyping is a simple usability testing technique designed to test interfaces quickly and cheaply. A paper prototype is nothing more than a visual representation of what an interface could look like on a piece of paper (or even a whiteboard or chalkboard). Unlike high-fidelity prototypes that allow for digital interactions to take place, paper prototypes are considered to be low-fidelity, in that they don’t allow direct user interaction. They can also range in sophistication, from a simple sketch using a pen and paper to simulate an interface, through to using designing or publishing software to create a more polished experience with additional visual elements.

‍

‍

‍

Showing a research participant a paper prototype is far from the real deal, but it can provide useful insights into how users may expect to interact with specific features and what makes sense to them from a basic, user-centered perspective. There are some mixed attitudes towards paper prototypes among the UX community, so before we make any distinct judgements, let's weigh up their pros and cons.

‍

Advantages 🏆

‍

• They’re cheap and fastPen and paper, a basic word document, Photoshop. With a paper prototype, you can take an idea and transform it into a low-fidelity (but workable) testing solution very quickly, without having to write code or use sophisticated tools. This is especially beneficial to researchers who work with tight budgets, and don’t have the time or resources to design an elaborate user testing plan.
• Anyone can do itPaper prototypes allow you to test designs without having to involve multiple roles in building them. Developers can take a back seat as you test initial ideas, before any code work begins.
• They encourage creativityFrom both the product teams participating in their design, but also from the users. They require the user to employ their imagination, and give them the opportunity express their thoughts and ideas on what improvements can be made. Because they look unfinished, they naturally invite constructive criticism and feedback.
• They help minimize your chances of failurePaper prototypes and user-centered design go hand in hand. Introducing real people into your design as early as possible can help verify whether you are on the right track, and generate feedback that may give you a good idea of whether your idea is likely to succeed or not.

‍

Disadvantages 😬

‍

• They’re not as polished as interactive prototypesIf executed poorly, paper prototypes can appear unprofessional and haphazard. They lack the richness of an interactive experience, and if our users are not well informed when coming in for a testing session, they may be surprised to be testing digital experiences on pieces of paper.
• The interaction is limitedDigital experiences can contain animations and interactions that can’t be replicated on paper. It can be difficult for a user to fully understand an interface when these elements are absent, and of course, the closer the interaction mimics the final product, the more reliable our findings will be.
• They require facilitationWith an interactive prototype you can assign your user tasks to complete and observe how they interact with the interface. Paper prototypes, however, require continuous guidance from a moderator in communicating next steps and ensuring participants understand the task at hand.
• Their results have to be interpreted carefullyPaper prototypes can’t emulate the final experience entirely. It is important to interpret their findings while keeping their limitations in mind. Although they can help minimize your chances of failure, they can’t guarantee that your final product will be a success. There are factors that determine success that cannot be captured on a piece of paper, and positive feedback at the prototyping stage does not necessarily equate to a well-received product further down the track.

‍

Improving the interface of card sorting, one prototype at a time 💡

‍

We recently embarked on a research project looking at the user interface of our card-sorting tool, OptimalSort. Our research has two main objectives — first of all to benchmark the current experience on laptops and tablets and identify ways in which we can improve the current interface. The second objective is to look at how we can improve the experience of card sorting on a mobile phone.

‍

Rather than replicating the desktop experience on a smaller screen, we want to create an intuitive experience for mobiles, ensuring we maintain the quality of data collected across devices.Our current mobile experience is a scaled down version of the desktop and still has room for improvement, but despite that, 9 per cent of our users utilize the app. We decided to start from the ground up and test an entirely new design using paper prototypes. In the spirit of testing early and often, we decided to jump right into testing sessions with real users. In our first testing sprint, we asked participants to take part in two tasks. The first was to perform an open or closed card sort on a laptop or tablet. The second task involved using paper prototypes to see how people would respond to the same experience on a mobile phone.

‍

‍

Context is everything 🎯

‍

What did we find? In the context of our research project, paper prototypes worked remarkably well. We were somewhat apprehensive at first, trying to figure out the exact flow of the experience and whether the people coming into our office would get it. As it turns out, people are clever, and even those with limited experience using a smartphone were able to navigate and identify areas for improvement just as easily as anyone else. Some participants even said they prefered the experience of testing paper prototypes over a laptop. In an effort to make our prototype-based tasks easy to understand and easy to explain to our participants, we reduced the full card sort to a few key interactions, minimizing the number of branches in the UI flow.

‍

This could explain a preference for the mobile task, where we only asked participants to sort through a handful of cards, as opposed to a whole set.The main thing we found was that no matter how well you plan your test, paper prototypes require you to be flexible in adapting the flow of your session to however your user responds. We accepted that deviating from our original plan was something we had to embrace, and in the end these additional conversations with our participants helped us generate insights above and beyond the basics we aimed to address. We now have a whole range of feedback that we can utilize in making more sophisticated, interactive prototypes.

‍

Whether our success with using paper prototypes was determined by the specific setup of our testing sessions, or simply by their pure usefulness as a research technique is hard to tell. By first performing a card sorting task on a laptop or tablet, our participants approached the paper prototype with an understanding of what exactly a card sort required. Therefore there is no guarantee that we would have achieved the same level of success in testing paper prototypes on their own. What this does demonstrate, however, is that paper prototyping is heavily dependent on the context of your assessment.

‍

Final thoughts 💬

‍

Paper prototypes are not guaranteed to work for everybody. If you’re designing an entirely new experience and trying to describe something complex in an abstracted form on paper, people may struggle to comprehend your idea. Even a careful explanation doesn’t guarantee that it will be fully understood by the user. Should this stop you from testing out the usefulness of paper prototypes in the context of your project? Absolutely not.

‍

In a perfect world we’d test high fidelity interactive prototypes that resemble the real deal as closely as possible, every step of the way. However, if we look at testing from a practical perspective, before we can fully test sophisticated designs, paper prototypes provide a great solution for generating initial feedback.In his article criticizing the use of paper prototypes, Jake Knapp makes the point that when we show customers a paper prototype we’re inviting feedback, not reactions. What we found in our research however, was quite the opposite.

‍

In our sessions, participants voiced their expectations and understanding of what actions were possible at each stage, without us having to probe specifically for feedback. Sure we also received general comments on icon or colour preferences, but for the most part our users gave us insights into what they felt throughout the experience, in addition to what they thought.

‍

Further reading 🧠

‍

• Why You Only Need To Test With 5 Users - Nielsen Norman Group’s Jakob Nielsen explains reveals his thoughts on only using five users when conducting usability testing.
• Sketching for better mobile experiences - Lennart Hennigs explains how to sketch and why you should do it in an article for Smashing Magazine.
• Paper prototypes work as well as software prototypes -  Bob Bailey explains why he thinks paper prototypes are just as good as software prototypes for usability testing.