Research is a team sport: advancing the work when everyone does the research
Summary
As UX roles evolve amid AI tooling, democratized practices, and shifting org structures, many experienced researchers are spending less time conducting studies—and more time enabling others to do it well. In complex environments like healthcare, the question is no longer whether research should happen continuously, but who does it, when it happens, and how “good” it needs to be to move the work forward. In this lightning talk, James Wieselman Schulman shares how he’s helped build a culture where research isn’t reserved for specialists, but embedded throughout design and delivery. Drawing from service and healthcare design, he explores how cross-functional teams can engage in research responsibly—without lowering standards or losing sight of ethics, rigor, and trust. You’ll hear practical examples of how to: Use research continuously—not just at the start—to shape workshops, prototypes, MVPs, and business decisions; create clear guardrails so non-researchers can conduct meaningful (even if imperfect) research and learn through doing; redefine research ROI around impact, learning velocity, and organizational confidence, not methodological perfection The opportunity isn’t to replace expertise, but to extend it. When expert researchers shift from gatekeepers to coaches, they raise the floor for everyone, protect what makes research human, and ensure empathy remains at the center of the work. This session is for researchers, designers, and leaders navigating the shift from research doer to research enabler. It offers a pragmatic, human-centered view of research—one where five good conversations can be better than none, learning happens through action, and advancing the work matters more than protecting the role.
Key Insights
-
•
Resource constraints require us to involve non-researchers in conducting and experiencing research.
-
•
Democratizing empathy means getting designers, engineers, and product owners closer to real users.
-
•
Palchinsky’s principles—novelty, survivability, and learnability—offer a useful lens for scaling empathy via research.
-
•
Novel experiences with user research can help non-experts develop human-centered mindsets despite imperfect methods.
-
•
Survivability means enabling experimentation that doesn’t threaten project budgets or organizational stability.
-
•
A small amount of imperfect research by partners still yields valuable learning and maintains overall ROI.
-
•
Learnability depends on creating feedback loops where researchers coach and mentor collaborators.
-
•
Repeated practice with scaled research tasks helps non-researchers gain skills without risking critical projects.
-
•
Empathy often emerges more from the experience of doing or observing research than from insights alone.
-
•
Researchers should become organizational thought leaders guiding when and how to involve others in research.
Notable Quotes
"We are asked to produce more and more work with fewer people and smaller teams."
"How might we democratize empathy at scale within our organizations?"
"The goal is not methodological perfection; empathy is the end game."
"Even bad research can be good because it creates learning opportunities."
"Ten interviews is enough to get most of the way to meaningful insights."
"Getting partners involved in research may mean accepting some imperfect interviews."
"Research is something that should happen throughout the process — early and often."
"The most transformative part of research is being involved in the work itself."
"You have to find ways for people to practice so they can learn without destroying projects."
"Researchers can become thought leaders by coaching and mentoring others on empathy and research."
Or choose a question:
More Videos
"Empathy in jazz means the band is in it together—when someone plays a wrong chord, the rest adapt and turn it into an opportunity."
Jim KalbachJazz Improvisation as a Model for Team Collaboration
November 6, 2017
"People saying you should write a book is nice, but it’s not the real reason you should write one."
Louis RosenfeldCoffee with Lou: Should You Write a (UX) Book?
March 7, 2024
"Propose new IC roles like a design problem: identify the need, gather research, and try it as an experiment with retrospectives."
Catt Small Micah Bennett Brian Carr Jessica HarlleeWhat's Next for ICs: Exploring Staff and Principal Designer Roles
February 22, 2024
"You might find that spending the most time getting people interested in collaboration is where the work really happens."
Marieke McCloskeyUser Science: Product Analytics & User Research
March 11, 2021
"Synthetic duplicates living on after data deletion raise ethical questions about users’ right to be forgotten."
Llewyn Paine[Demo] Deploying AI doppelgangers to de-identify user research recordings
June 5, 2024
"If you cannot remove a treatment, it may not be a true cause."
Joshua NobleCasual Inference
October 6, 2023
"Not all learnings lead to crucial conversations, but big insights often do, requiring emotional awareness."
Sara LogelYour Colleagues are Your Users Too
March 29, 2023
"We made a very intentional choice to build in five minute breaks after every talk based on feedback and experience."
Bria Alexander Louis RosenfeldWelcome
January 8, 2024
"Confidence is a higher burden in retail because people are giving real money; inaccessible flows cause quick abandonment."
Sam ProulxOnline Shopping: Designing an Accessible Experience
June 7, 2023
