Skip to content

People-centered Design

  • People
  • Design
  • Business
  • More …
    • Thinking about AI
    • Prototyping UX
  • People
  • Design
  • Business
  • More …
    • Thinking about AI
    • Prototyping UX

Don’t write interview guides

If you are going to meet with users and do some qualitative research then I expect (hope, even) that you have had it drilled in to you to carefully construct an interview guide. Now, I ask you to remember that lesson, but throw away the interview guide!

The very reason we take the time to go and meet with our users is to learn from them and to discover new insights about their behaviours, needs and desires.

The very concept of an interview guide implies that you are taking the lead and guiding them. Which, in turn, implies that you know what needs to be talked about … so what is the real chance of uncovering new discoveries here?

Thus, of course, you are throwing away the interview guide, not to have nothing, but in order to create something better …

This represents the first, but lesser, of two issues with ‘interview guides’ – it should be more of a conversation than an interview, and it should be about discovering what the person genuinely knows, thinks or feels. Thus, one is searching for spontaneous comments and tidbits, rather than those that come in response to a well-structured question. It is more akin to a Hercule Poirot (or Miss Marple) conversation – aimed to get someone to reveal something without prompting them – or more akin to a pub conversation that might go anywhere than an interview.

Some teachers of user research methods say that you should never talk about yourself, but in conversations, stories need to come equally from both parties – a story shared leads to one returned. Of course, your stories might be rather deliberate (e.g. “I was talking to someone the other day who said that they never customised the interface …”) but they need to be slipped Ito the conversation as and when appropriate.

The bigger issue with a focus on writing the interview guide is that it gets the team immediately focussed on what they want to learn from the people they are meeting, which is usually closely related to the current state of the design and development project. However, the people you are going to meet are not steeped in your design project and the questions you need answered are unlikely to be questions that make sense to them.

So, the solution to this challenge is to change your perspective … The first step is to capture very clearly (and as a team) the looming decisions, or high-cost-of-failure decisions recently taken – these are what needs to be explored with input from your users and other people.

Once you know what decisions you are concerned with, then you can shift to what data (that users might be able to provide) would help you make those decisions, or validate those already taken.

And then finally, you need to make the hardest shift in perspective – what can your users (and other people) tell you, or show you that would enable you discover the data you would like to have? It is very rare that users know the answers to the team’s internal questions, but they can provide stories and experiences and opinions (aka data) that might just enable you to uncover the answers you need.

UX strategy or Design Strategy?

Brand strategy and design strategy seem to be well understood terms, but the idea of an experience strategy seems to be a step too far for many (is it not just the same as one these other two?).

THE HAZARDS OF USER DATA AND FEEDBACK …

It seems almost sacrilegious to say it, but I think it is really important to maintain significant caution around data obtained from user feedback, testing or group discussions. Too often I hear people proudly say that all their design decisions are based on feedback from users, or one hears leadership asking that all the design decisions be based on documented data from user feedback. These attitudes are, of course, well-founded, but at the same time they are seriously misguided – and for a number of different reasons …

Can we judge design from a single concept?

In the real world of commercial product design it is not uncommon for (UX) designers to spend most of their time working on the nuts and bolts (pixels and screens) of a single concept. But in order to identify the best approach to meeting the constraints of user needs, commerce and technology it is unlikely that the first concept is the optimal one. There is a reason many designers like to have a sketch books.

Usability considered harmful …?

Not necessarily the same as gathering input from users, ‘usability’ often implies a rigorous testing of a product or interface (in A-B testing or similar). But such rigorous, data-driven processes can arguably be quite detrimental to successful product or service design.

The importance of empathy

Who needs to understand who? But with whom? Most work focuses on our empathy with our customers or users, but it may often be the case that we need empathy with our colleagues even more.

A map of whose journey?

Journey maps, experience roadmaps, customer experience journeys are all common tools nowadays, but a key question that needs to be asked is "whose journey are we mapping?" and is that the right person?

Medical Equipment

Delivering radiation therapy

UX Prototyping

UE Boom

Interviewing Users

Locomotive maintenance

  • Welcome
  • What’s New?
  • About
  • Welcome
  • What’s New?
  • About

info@peoplecentereddesign.org

© 2026 David Gilmore