UX research for product teams.
A one-day in-house programme on choosing the right method, running it well, and getting the findings acted on. Built around a real decision your team faces.
A decade of design training. Companies that have paid us to train their people.
Strong on craft, thin upstream of it.
The commonest shape we are called into: a mature design system, confident UI work, and nobody checking whether the thing being built is the right thing.
Teams who commission research
Or who have to do it themselves between everything else.
A design system with nothing upstream
Strong system, no research practice feeding it.
Findings that get ignored
Designers who can run a session and watch nothing change.
AI made synthesis fast
And nobody is sure how far to trust it.
From a worry to a decision people act on.
Run against a real question of yours, not a case study.
Starting from the decision, not the method
Work backwards from what the team has to decide, so the research has somewhere to land.
→ the decision your next study has to serve, written downTurning a vague worry into a testable question
Separate assumptions from facts, then turn the riskiest assumption into something you can actually check.
→ your assumptions sorted, riskiest firstChoosing a method you can afford
Interviews, concept tests, usability sessions, surveys and analytics: what each one can and cannot tell you.
→ a method chosen for your real question, with the trade-off namedRunning a session without leading the witness
How to ask, when to shut up, and the questions that quietly produce the answer you wanted.
→ a discussion guide for your study, written in the roomMaking sense of what you heard
Affinity mapping a real transcript, and using AI for synthesis without letting it invent a theme.
→ a synthesised set of findings from real materialGetting the findings acted on
The part most teams skip. How to present research so it changes a roadmap rather than filling a deck.
→ a one-page write-up aimed at the people who decideA study in progress, not a reading list.
A research question
Tied to a decision your team actually has to make.
A discussion guide
For that study, written during the day.
Findings, synthesised
From real material, not a worked example.
A one-page report
The format the rest of the business will actually read.
Before you enquire.
Do we need a researcher on the team already?
No. The day is built for teams that have no researcher, or one researcher and more questions than they can answer. If you do have a research practice, say so when you enquire and we will pitch the day further up.
Do we work on a real question or a worked example?
A real one. We ask in advance for a decision your team is facing, and the guide, the session and the synthesis all run against that. Teams leave with work in progress rather than notes.
Where does AI fit?
Mostly in synthesis and in first drafts of guides and write-ups, and we teach both. We are equally direct about the limits: a model will happily produce a confident theme from six transcripts that do not support it, so the day includes how to check its work rather than just how to prompt it.
Can it be combined with other in-house days?
How do we know it will fit our team?
We scope it with you first. You tell us what your team already does, what they are stuck on and what they are working on right now, and the day is built against that product rather than a worked example. You see the curriculum before you commit, and we are happy to walk your team through it so they can push back on it.
Enquire about this programme.
Tell us the decision you need answered, who would be in the room, and your preferred timing. Naveed will reply personally within one working day.
*Advertised price assumes 10 or more participants. Prices vary depending on the number of participants.