CONTEXT
Jahnavi: A couple of maturity model research reports were published recently (User Interviews & Maze for example). While these are fantastic reports in their own right, both Achyutha and I realised we wanted to provide an Indian perspective. India is a hub for companies headquartered in North America or even Europe, but there are also a huge number of startups and Indian-headquartered tech companies. User research is coming into its own in India as it may in the global south and it’s essential to understand the “state of research” in India because it will be different to that seen in the global north. The intent is not to go deeper into the maturity model and its insights. We intend to set some context in this article on areas we need to reflect on before we consider a maturity model for India or the global south context.
Achyutha comes from a product tech background with years of experience in consulting, building research and design teams. I, Jahnavi, come from an agency background, having worked with multiple teams and industry leaders from various domains in India and internationally.
Achyutha: The context of the Indian ecosystem is that there are distinct areas within research of applicability or execution in India and many Global South countries. The UXR history draws a clear note on the Western influence of technology and HCI import that led to UX and UXR development through companies, institutions and practitioners. Market research, ethnography, qualitative research and its techniques have not only been localised but also researchers in India developed their own methods and techniques relevant to a billion users in India. Although our tech ecosystem in India is heavily built on the “Western model” of thinking, the business execution has remained localised. The experience of execution has led research practitioners, tech and business teams over a period of time to develop a more localised, Indian POV. They have learnt through research insights about Indian users’ needs, motivations and behaviours that are often complex and layered. This has led product builders and businesses to be more mindful of the Indian context and user needs for business success across sectors. Coupled with the bullish growth of the Indian economy in a global context, the value of insights, research and product building rooted in Indian users will lead to the maturity of the user research ecosystem in the country.
COMMONALITY
Jahnavi: Going through these reports, there were many commonalities between what was published and the Indian landscape. The execution of research, research methodologies used and preference for certain methodologies is certainly something we’ve seen here which can be linked to the advancement of research from the global north. Where research sits in the organisational structure, either centralised or decentralised or a hybrid model is also the same. Whichever model is employed though, research needs to be closer to business in order for researchers to understand business context and for business to value research. Research being closer to business will only expand the scope of research and impact the research maturity model.
Achyutha: Global research teams that have a presence of local teams share common practices and templates for research and operations although some localisation in execution happens. More global companies are establishing offices in India and in the global south regions which also means, challenges faced in India are common across global teams (the assumption is that Indian teams are working with global users and teams). The challenge that some global teams are facing is to strike a balance between maintaining global consistency in practice and allowing growth for local teams in their context which is more bottom-up than top-down. An example would be to allow the experimentation of research and its techniques locally or provide in-depth context or support to local teams for better internal opportunities and success within the company. To be specific, the research team in headquarters (commonly present in the global north) is proximate to better company opportunities and visibility, unlike the local teams. Hence, when we develop the maturity model, how do we evaluate a diverse global research team spread across regions?
POINT OF VIEWS
Jahnavi: We can’t have a discussion on developing maturity models without talking about the value of research in an organisation. The democratisation of research only furthers the link between product and research and restrains research from becoming more strategic in nature. How can research provide value beyond generative and evaluative insights? Democratisation needs an understanding and acceptance of research and research rigour that is currently missing. When research is deeply embedded in the business and all stakeholders have a clear idea of where researchers can provide value and how to bring in non-researchers to conduct research, then democratisation can work. Research mature organisations know how and when to implement democratisation. The ecosystem is not mature enough yet to support democratisation. Should democratisation be an indication of a research-mature organisation is something to think about.
Achyutha: An area to reflect upon in the maturity model is to recognise what is the starting point of maturity in user research. Take the example of the Maze report, where level 1 is defined as no active researchers hired or research conducted by non-researchers. The sources of insight are from data analytics, external reports or CX support cannot be considered part of the maturity model for research. This would have been Level 0 where there is no presence of a qualified user researcher. Level 1 has to start with a minimum hire of one researcher, some levels of evaluative research or researcher collecting data points from different sources to synthesise them into insights that are actionable. As a user research community, we need to proactively dissipate this bias that user quotes or data findings by non-researchers can qualify as research insights nor the company can claim it does user research. This formalisation of user research is critical as part of understanding maturity models.
CONCLUSION
Jahnavi: In addition, there needs to be a more concerted effort to bring the global south perspective along with the global north. Being a part of a global research ops community, I see the value of a diverse and global research community and there is a need for this ecosystem to extend to user researchers.
Achyutha: For the sake of building a case in the maturity model, the article “waves of research practice” by Dave Hora could have been a more practical idea to borrow. We could consider a maturity model based on the scope and impact of user research within the company and the ecosystem. The criteria and definition of levels are critical areas for deep dive before a more extensive mapping of maturity is considered. I do recognise putting something out there on maturity models is a good start instead of nothing. However, a deeper understanding of maturity models and such reports influencing stakeholders from the ecosystem could have a long-lasting impact on the user research community.
—-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jahnavi Mirashi:
A user research consultant working with companies globally to assist them with their user research needs. She’s also a board member of ResearchOps, a global community of over 15k research operations practitioners and researchers.
Achyutha Sharma:
A user research leader has extensive experience in commercial and non-profit sectors with depth in understanding billion users and markets.