microsoft/hve-core

---
title: "Method 2: Design Research"
description: "Investigate user needs, behaviors, and environmental conditions through curiosity-driven research that builds an evidence base for synthesis."
sidebar_position: 6
author: Microsoft
ms.date: 2026-02-25
ms.topic: tutorial
keywords: [design thinking, method-02, design-research]
estimated_reading_time: 5
---

## What This Method Does

Method 2 builds an evidence base by investigating real users in their actual environments. You gather firsthand observations, conduct interviews, and document the behaviors, workarounds, and unmet needs that users themselves may not articulate. The goal is curiosity-driven discovery, not confirmation of existing assumptions.

Research findings replace speculation with observed reality. Every insight you capture here becomes raw material for the synthesis that follows in Method 3.

## When to Use

* After completing scope conversations (Method 1) with clear boundaries and stakeholder alignment
* When you need to understand how users actually work, not just how they describe their work
* When assumptions from stakeholder conversations need field validation
* Before attempting to synthesize patterns or generate solutions

## Space Context

Method 2 sits in the **middle of the Problem Space**, between scope definition (Method 1) and pattern synthesis (Method 3). Where Method 1 defines the boundaries, Method 2 fills those boundaries with evidence. The research you conduct here directly determines the quality of insights available for synthesis.

> [!NOTE]
> Research quality depends on observing real behavior in real environments. Surveys and questionnaires alone cannot replace direct observation and conversation.

## Key Activities

* Research planning: Define research targets across three tiers. Tier 1 covers primary users who interact with the system daily. Tier 2 addresses secondary users affected by the system's outputs. Tier 3 captures edge-case or infrequent users whose needs often reveal design blind spots.
* Interview execution: Conduct curiosity-driven interviews that follow the user's narrative rather than a rigid script. Let their experience guide the conversation.
* Environmental observation: Document the physical and operational context where users work. Noise levels, lighting, equipment layout, interruption patterns, and workarounds all shape what solutions are viable.
* Evidence documentation: Record findings as observations with confidence levels (high, medium, low) based on corroboration across sources. Separate what you saw from what you interpreted.
* Assumption validation: Compare research observations against assumptions surfaced in Method 1. Mark each assumption as confirmed, contradicted, or still unvalidated.

## How to Start

Review the scope statement and constraint inventory from Method 1. Identify your Tier 1 research targets and plan your first observation or interview session.

Use this prompt to prepare a research session:

```text
I've completed scope conversations for [project]. The primary users are [user group]
working in [environment]. Help me design a research plan that covers interview
questions, environmental observation points, and assumption validation checks.
```

During research sessions:

* Observe before asking questions
* Follow the user's narrative; don't redirect to your agenda
* Document environmental factors (noise, lighting, space, workflow interruptions)
* Capture direct quotes alongside behavioral observations

## Expected Outputs

* Research findings organized by theme with confidence levels (high, medium, low)
* Environmental observation notes documenting physical and operational context
* Interview summaries separating observed behavior from user-stated preferences
* Updated assumption log showing which Method 1 assumptions were confirmed, contradicted, or remain open
* Research gaps identified for potential follow-up

## Quality Checks

* Research covers all three target tiers (primary, secondary, edge-case users)
* Environmental observations are documented alongside interview findings
* Confidence levels distinguish corroborated evidence from single-source observations
* Assumptions from Method 1 are explicitly validated or contradicted with evidence
* Findings separate observed behavior from interpretation

## Next Method

When you have sufficient research across user tiers and confidence in your evidence base, proceed to [Method 3: Input Synthesis](method-03-input-synthesis.md) to identify patterns and develop actionable insights.

## Related Resources

* [Method 1: Scope Conversations](method-01-scope-conversations.md)
* [Method 3: Input Synthesis](method-03-input-synthesis.md)
* [Design Thinking Overview](README.md)

> Brought to you by microsoft/hve-core

<!-- markdownlint-disable MD036 -->
*🤖 Crafted with precision by ✨Copilot following brilliant human instruction,
then carefully refined by our team of discerning human reviewers.*
<!-- markdownlint-enable MD036 -->