Part 2: A Collaborative Research Model for Diverse Ideas & Perspective

Collaborative Research is the process of collecting, analyzing, and synthesizing research data together. There are several variations of collaborative research. For example, collaborative research might describe:

• a team of trained researchers working together on a case study or toward a shared goal
• a researcher working with assistants who may or may not have research training
• a researcher collaborating with participants to affect change through research (sometimes called action research)
• a researcher or research team collaborating with other functions or departments
• a research agency collaborating with a client

Since most applied research doesn't happen in a bubble, it means more often than not research is a collaborative effort. Increasingly in private enterprises collaborative research means entrusting one or more parts of that process, like note-taking or interviewing, to stakeholders who don't primarily identify as "a researcher." In these scenarios there is often varying degrees of oversight involved. For example, in a moderated study interviews might be conducted by a researcher, with a stakeholder such as a designer, product manager, or engineer observing, taking notes, or asking follow-up questions. In an organization that has more of a decentralized or distributed research function, direct stakeholders might be conducting and analyzing their own research using tools and resources provided by research teams such as templates or documentation to enable self-guided research.

Collaborative Research also involves pooling data from various sources and participants from different institutions, organizations, and communities. It's not just about who you invite to do research with you, but who you end up collecting data from as well. A focus on the collaborative nature of research means that careful attention is paid to how the research motions involved interact within the cultural context. For example if a case study aims to understand or improve the lives of a certain group, it is necessary to represent that group with a collaborative lens. This type of collaborative approach helps create an environment for participants where it is felt you are doing research with them, instead of on them.

The benefits of Collaborative Research are vast. With diversity in data, perspective, and experience, you get richer and more innovative ideas. From Notably's perspective, anyone can cook, anyone can do research. The challenge then becomes managing the cooks in the kitchen and (to keep the analogy going) keeping the quality of ingredients high.

There's little benefit to being the single throughput of research knowledge inside an organization. In fact, there are quite a few risks.

To understand the potential risks we've broken them down by impact on the organization and the research itself.

Organizational risks

Limited perspective and expertise

‍Having a single source of research can put an organization at risk of making uninformed decisions. This is because when researcher's aren't embedded as subject matter experts on a team, they may not have all the necessary data points and understand the nuances of that team's specific user needs.

Lack of accurate cumulative knowledge

‍Relying too much on one team's knowledge and expertise also limits the ability to build cumulative knowledge that truly represents the wider organization. This also limits the organization's ability to effectively identify potential areas for improvement or expansion.

Walking repository‍

Perhaps the pain point we hear the most from research with our users is fielding redundant and repetitive requests for research. When one person or team becomes the "go-to" person for knowledge, what happens when they leave? A walking repository or lack of centralized, documented research is a huge risk to the organization.

Less empathy and understanding

‍With only one throughput of research, the organization misses out on answers to important questions that should be asked by those building the solutions directly and the empathy gained by hearing questions answered directly. It relies solely on the researcher as the interpreter to ask all the questions and become a master storyteller to create empathy. That's a tall order!

Closing the gap between a handful or single person doing research and those using it is no small organizational feat. The risks don't stop there. There's significant risk to the research itself when it comes to relying on a single throughput for research as opposed to a collaborative research model.

Risks to the research itself

Limited in volume of research

‍When people rely solely on the one person or team to conduct research, they're likely overwhelmed with requests and struggle to deliver insights fast enough or with enough quality. Or worse, teams don't request research at all, carrying on with solutions riddled with hypotheses and best-guesses because teams can't or don't want to wait.

Shortfalls in Synthesis

‍When synthesizing the results of user research, it's important to have another set of eyes and ears on the process. This is to ensure key insights are accurately captured and draw valid conclusions. Having collaborators on research also is helpful when checking for bias and providing another perspective.

Powerpoint Graveyards

Presenting only written reports or presentations limits an organization’s ability to gain a more holistic view of its users’ needs. This includes intangibles such as context, environment, and body language. These can often be missed without physical observation. More importantly, not being able to share your research findings with the rest of the org runs the risk of hard work being lost into the powerpoint graveyard. 

In theory, a Collaborative Research strategy significantly reduces the risk that comes with being the single throughput of research inside of an organization, but it doesn't come easy or without its own implementation challenges.

Below are some ways to kick off Collaborative Research as a key step on your journey towards Research Enablement:

Find research allies

At the core of Collaborative Research is working together, so don't go at it alone. Recruit a couple of cross-functional allies that have shown an interest in research and work with them to invest toward making research accessible to a broader group. A good place to start is sales, support, and design. These are roles that generally attract people who have a natural curiosity and empathy for customers.

Create resources

One of the biggest challenges with adoption of research enablement is because people feel intimidated or confused about the work of researchers. They'll be wondering "am I doing this wrong?" Focus on creating resources that build simple research skills and habits for a foundation of Collaborative Research. Some helpful resources to start could be templates for a research plan, an interview guide, or lunch and learn on topics like asking good questions.

Start small

Help yourself and your team build a sustainable collaborative research practice by focusing on small, attainable research habits. Make it a habit to communicate when studies are happening and opening up studies for observers. It doesn't have to be an overnight transformation, it can be a small incremental step towards your goal of a fully collaborative research machine.

Storytell and inspire

We spoke earlier to the tall order of being a master storyteller. Storytelling is what takes good research across the finish line and makes it great. It's one thing to share the output of research in a powerpoint deck, but challenge yourself to help people experience and feel the research. To summarize the importance of storytelling we will leave this section with a quote from Maya Angelou, "I've learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel."

As the appetite for Collaborative Research grows in a Research Enabled organization, research leadership will need to decide just how much and when it’s appropriate to collaborate.

It's a line designers are all-too-familiar with walking when co-creating with cross-functional stakeholders. And like co-creation where design can quickly become design by committee, boundaries should be established for: 

• when research should only be conducted by researchers
• when it's encouraged for non-researchers to run with research
• when a paired-research approach is best
• and lastly, when no research should be conducted at all

Every organization will have its own tolerance for risk, but generally speaking these are some guidelines to consider.

When the impact of research is broad & cross-departmental

Broad research studies are far-reaching and have implications on multiple departments. Most often they should be led by a researcher who has an objective, birdseye view across the entire organization or co-led with representatives from the impacted teams. 

When the research is high-impact, strategic, and generative

Generative research studies involve big meaty questions that impact strategy and are imperative to the bigger goals for the company. They can be led by a researcher or or co-led with strategic partners in the organization.

When the decisions are low-risk and low-impact

Evaluative research are smaller, bite sized questions that measure the critical tasks and solutions of an experience in a product or service. For example, this might include user testing or market research. They can receive lightweight support by a researcher or driven completely by a non-researcher.

When research has already been conducted

In organizations where studies were sporadic and conducted in siloes, redundant research is a common pain point. In a Collaborative Research model, you’ll know what you do (and don’t) know already and avoid conducting duplicative research.