Joinlytics

THE ILLUSION OF INSIGHTS:
WHEN UX RESEARCH BECOMES A PERFORMANCE

User Experience Research (UXR) has never been more in demand — and yet, ironically, it’s losing its roots.

In the rush to become “data-informed,” many companies are hiring researchers without proper training in research methodology. A few weeks of bootcamp, an online certificate, or a trendy LinkedIn course seem to be enough to land a UXR title.

What’s often missing?

A deep understanding of research design, bias mitigation, sampling, or statistical validity — the very things that make research… well, research.

🔹 Fast research ≠ good research

And for those who do come in with solid academic or methodological backgrounds — people trained to ask the right questions, validate assumptions, and surface real insights — expectations often feel disconnected from reality.

You’re asked to design, recruit, conduct, analyze, and present a full qualitative study — typically only 10 user interviews — all within two weeks. No time for proper planning, no space for thoughtful analysis.

Another question no one seems to be asking:
How can you base major product decisions on just 10 interviews — especially in companies with thousands or even millions of diverse users?

The result?
Stretching findings to fit a narrative, producing insights that don’t truly reflect real user problems.

🔹 Methodology is not optional

Worse still, researchers are often told what method to use before they’ve even had time to frame the problem.
„Just go there and interview them. You don’t need to prepare anything.“
This mindset is common and deeply flawed.

Research without proper preparation isn’t research — it’s guesswork. Without defining research questions, selecting a representative sample, preparing interview guides or evaluation metrics, the process becomes surface-level and untrustworthy.

Yet some teams still treat methodology as a “nice-to-have” rather than the foundation of credible insights.

🔹 The real cost

This culture leads to two outcomes — both damaging:

Skilled researchers burn out or leave the field altogether. They see their expertise reduced to a sprint deliverable, and their passion for evidence-based impact slowly erodes.
Less-experienced researchers fill the gap, often mimicking the form of research without the substance. Personas are built from five friends, conclusions drawn from vague observations, and stakeholder biases go unchallenged.

This isn’t to gatekeep the field — quite the opposite. UX research should be accessible and evolving. But when rigor disappears, so does trust in research. Teams make poor decisions based on weak evidence, and the reputation of UXR as a whole suffers.

🔹 What needs to change?

Hire for substance, not surface.
Stop hiring based on quick certificates or trendy bootcamps. UX research demands more than enthusiasm — it requires deep, structured expertise built over time. Prioritize those who have seriously studied research methodology, whether through formal education or mentorship under experienced researchers. You can’t master building rigorous questions or sound hypotheses in a few weeks — it takes years of study and practice. Without a solid grasp of bias, sampling, triangulation, and critical analysis, you’re not building research strength — you’re building an illusion of understanding. And the real question is: do you want to base critical product decisions on fragile, unvalidated insights?
Trust researchers to choose the method.
Don’t dictate the approach before the problem is even defined. If the situation calls for a diary study, a field observation, or a quant survey, let researchers lead the way. Methodology should be selected based on the research question, not stakeholder assumptions.
Respect the time quality research requires.
Good research is not a sprint — it’s a craft. It needs time for planning, thoughtful execution, deep analysis, and sense-making. Rushing the process only creates noise, not insight.
Support critical thinking, not just deliverables.
Researchers should have the autonomy to push back when timelines or methods compromise quality. Teach teams to understand that fast answers are often fragile answers — and that real value comes from depth, not speed.
Expand the definition of UXR.
Modern researchers need to navigate qualitative and quantitative worlds. Give them space (and tools) to track user behavior, clean and analyze data, find patterns, visualize results, and forecast trends — not just run interviews.

🔹 The future of UX Research