Phil Gordon
Leading UX Research Teams in the Trenches
In this episode of Brave UX, Phil Gordon shares some must listen and hard-fought insights into what it takes to successfully lead and manage UX research teams and engage with stakeholders.
Highlights include:
- What is the essential ingredient for effective UX research?
- How can you approach difficult conversations with team members?
- What is the difference between having empathy and sympathy for users?
Who is Phil Gordon?
Phil is a Product Insights Manager at Spotify in New York, where he is responsible for a team of researchers and data scientists.
He has over 13 years experience in UX research, which has taken him many places, including big tech, startups, luxury goods, agency, and a stint of freelance.
Prior to joining Spotify, Phil was the UX Research Manager at UberEats, where he was responsible for the “eater” side of the marketplace.
Transcript
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Hello and welcome to another episode of Brave UX. I'm Brendan Jarvis, Managing Founder of The Space InBetween and it's my job to help you to put the pieces of the product puzzle together. I do that by interviewing world class UX researchers and product management professionals and they tell us their stories, learnings, and share with us some of their expert advice. My guest today is Phil Gordon. Phil is an experienced UX researcher and speaker residing in New York USA. He has over 13 years of experience working to improve the usability, utility and usefulness of digital products. Phil currently works at Spotify where he is products insights manager responsible for blending the worlds of UX research and data science into long term positive outcomes for users. Prior to joining Spotify, Phil was the UX research manager at Uber Eats one of my favorite, favorite apps where he is responsible for the eater or customer side of the marketplace.
- And his time at Uber Eats Phil in his team contributed insights on the conversion journey that saw the platform experience 100% growth inside of eight months. Phil's UX research journey has taken him to many places, including big tech, IT services, Silicon Valley startups, lUXury goods, even some time on the agency side as well as a stint freelance. Phil holds a BA in cognitive science from Brown University. He is deeply curious about other people's behavior, especially when it comes to the digital experience and he works tirelessly to increase the impact personal fulfillment and professional growth of his team of researchers. Phil, welcome to the show.
- Phil Gordon:
- Thank you so much. What an introduction. That was wonderful. Thank you. I really appreciate that. It's a pleasure to be here.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- It's great to have you. I've really been looking forward to this conversation and I wanted to start us off on a note which is quite close to home. I understand that after finishing your degree at Brown, you came to New Zealand trying to find some meaning in your life. Tell us about that.
- Phil Gordon:
- That is true. Yeah, so it was actually my sophomore year at Brown. I ran into a friend who had already graduated and asked him what he'd been up to and he said, well, I'd been wooing in New Zealand. I said, WWOOFing, what is that? And he gave me the spiel and from that moment I knew that was where I was gonna go after I graduated from college. So I got a friend, we got together, we embarked, I think it was early November of 2003 and we got to New Zealand. We bought a car and we just started driving around and seeing who would take us on for some work. We went all over the north island. He actually wound up getting hurt and decided to leave and go paint houses in Australia for some reason. So I kept on [laugh] and covered the entire south island as well.
- And it was just an incredible experience. I mean, New Zealand is a country unlike any other. I tell people this all the time. The colors there are more vibrant, the greens are green, under the blues are bluer. Everything is just magical. And to be able to get to meet and work with so many amazing people was just an incredible experience. Unfortunately it didn't teach me what I wanted to actually do when I grew up, but it did gimme some very valuable life lessons, namely, you know, have to shovel the poop before you can drive the tractor. [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Tell us about that. So tell us about WWOOFing and people that don't know what it is. I mean, why does it lead to shoveling poop and driving tractors? How does that work?
- Phil Gordon:
- So WWOOFing stands for Willing Workers on Organic Farms and it's an international program. It's funny, it's still, it's last I checked still an analog product or analog interface in that it's a book. And so you reach out to the individual country in which you're hoping to WWOOF, you receive the book that lists all of the farmers in that country and then you call them and say, Hey, I'm gonna be in your area on these dates. Is there any chance that you have availability? And that's the amazing thing is that they often don't. So you're often trying to find who does have availability, where should I be going? And so having a car certainly made that a lot easier. But you do start to find places that can take you for whatever period of time and then you develop relationships with the people. And the amazing thing about it is that it's four hours of work in exchange for room and board. So we're not talking backbreaking all day work, it's just the morning and then you get to spend the rest of the day doing whatever it is you want to do. So it's a great way to get to experience a country, see it as a local and truly make some amazing connections along the way.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, sounds great. But it also sounded like you didn't manage to find what you were wanting to do when you grew up. So how did you realize that what you wanted to do was UX research?
- Phil Gordon:
- It not it didn't come naturally or it, it wound up falling in my lap, but not immediately. So I'll start by saying that growing up, my dad owned a restaurant. He actually sold it at the start of this year, which the timing is just incredible. But he owned it for 44 years and I didn't realize it, but by working in his restaurant, I was getting a first class education in customer experience and customer experience research. I remember at one point somebody coming to my dad who had apparently been coming to the restaurant for years and saying, oh, I had to wait for my reservation for 10 minutes. I'm never coming back. My dad said, okay, well sorry to hear that [laugh], have a good one. But it just showed me how fickle people can be and these were just incredible life lessons that I kind of tucked away, got my degree in cognitive science, wasn't really sure what to do with it. Wound up working in an NIH funded research lab, national Institutes of Health funded research lab. Hated that. That was awful. It was just doing the same thing over and over and over again and it was just mind numbing. Did a couple other odd jobs. And then I wound up in recruiting or actually sort of day of logistics coordination at a company that was building search interfaces called Endeca. And I had helped hire their first UX researcher. This is a guy named Blade who I'm in forever. Debt and thankfulness too. Blade and Blade Catelli.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Like the Vampire Hunter.
- Phil Gordon:
- Yes,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Great name. Love it.
- Phil Gordon:
- It is. And he is a great guy and he and I had chatted, I told him about my background and he came to me one day and said, look, I could really use some help. Why don't you come to this presentation I'm giving tomorrow? I'm gonna talk about UX research and what it is and empathetic design. And I went and attended his presentation and it was just floor. I was like, this is what I've been looking for. This is research is amazing, but it's the right kind of research you're building on what you learn. It's not just doing the same thing over and over and over again. And so luckily I was able to get the interview land, the position, and he was my mentor. And here I am 13 years later. But again, forever thankful to Blade
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. Yeah, I am great work Blade. We're definitely, yes, you need these people. There's always one or two people in everybody's journey that have been quite important as to where they've gotten. So no, that's fantastic. I'm interested, you know, mentioned your degree at Brown, which was in cognitive science. What if any role has that played in, even if it's in a weird roundabout way and your practice as a UX researcher?
- Phil Gordon:
- It was funny, when I was studying at Brown, I chose cognitive science because it just seemed like such an interesting way to spend my education. Brown is unique and that there really are no prerequisites, there's no sort of standard curriculum. You take the courses that are meaningful to you. Obviously there are requirements to complete the degree but the thing I loved about cognitive science and the thing that really hooked me on it was perception and looking at the way people sort of take in the world and understand it. And so that is certainly a thread that ties directly from what I learned in university to what I do today. Because that's what I think that we're doing as researchers, as product owners and managers. We are managing perception, we're managing expectations. And I think that's one of the most critical things that we do in terms of ensuring that somebody is successful using a product.
- I think that if somebody has clear expectations when they are launching an interface for the first time, their ability to navigate that interface and be successful at whatever it is that you're hoping they do, increases significantly. But if you're not able to manage those expectations, if you somehow along the way lose their train of thought, lose what they're doing, they very easily get bored, get distracted, and lo and behold, they're just gonna turn away and say, I wasn't doing this thing before. And that was a lot easier than trying to persevere through what I don't understand. So I think that really is the thread that connects to two pieces and I'm thrilled that I get to help clients, businesses, whoever understand that relationship.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, yeah. Well you've spoken about managing perception, let's talk about managing other people, cuz I understand in recent years, perhaps in the last five or so that you've taken on more leadership responsibilities and you're now in charge of managing other researchers and their work. Is this responsibility something that you've actively sought or has it just sort of happened?
- Phil Gordon:
- It was something that I probably seven to eight years into my career started to think about is, is this the path that I want to go down or do I want to remain on this more technical path? Those sort of being the two options, especially in house at so many companies. And I've long had a passion for managing. I think that's something that my dad instilled in me. He obviously is a restaurant owner had a lot of different people to manage and a lot of different hats to wear. And so it's probably just something that he innately passed on to me. And I've also felt that by having an opportunity to manage, I would be able to share some of the lessons that I've learned through my career, which has been very much in the school of hard knocks. It's something that my dad would say and picking up these lessons along the way, it's the kind of thing where I felt like I could help share that wisdom with other researchers so that they could at least have an idea of, one, it's okay to make mistakes and two, here are some ways that somebody that I'm learning from has made mistakes and learned from those particular mistakes.
- So at that point I started to say managing does seem like the path that I really want to embark upon. And here I am several years later now having that opportunity and loving it. I really do enjoy it.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- This culture around being uncomfortable with making mistakes, no matter how much we say that we buy into the fail fast mentality that sort of pervades our area. We still run up against this. This is something that I have observed myself and I really do wonder how much of it has to do with the way in which we're educating people. There's this strive for perfection, and it's really refreshing to hear you say what you've just said about it's okay to fail and here are some examples because really important that we break down that perfectionist tendency and the work that we do.
- Phil Gordon:
- I absolutely agree with that. Yeah, [laugh],
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So tell me what you mentioned school of hard knocks and that you've had some challenges in your career. Perhaps if we think about the move into managing other researchers, what have been some of the challenges that you've had in that transition?
- Phil Gordon:
- So I was thinking as I prepared for this conversation with you about reflecting on my career and especially looking at some of the previous interviews you've done for this series, just seeing some of the luminaries that you're speaking to and how some of their experiences just seem like they came almost naturally to them. And for me it feels like I have, it's almost like you've got the bumpers in bowling and just kind of bouncing back and forth off the bumpers as I make my way down the lane and eventually you do hit the pins. I think the number one mistake that I've made in my career and probably more than once was failing to just as we were discussing set clear expectations, but with my team regarding the role of UX research and how UX research is unique to the point of one of your previous conversations.
- It differs from market research, which I think a lot of people have that expectation maybe when they hear research, oh, you're gonna help me size my market, you're gonna help me understand how I should take this product to market, et cetera. And I think that the end result of failing to set accurate expectations with team members is a lack of trust or the failure to create that inherent trust. And I think that without trust research is honestly, it's somewhat pointless because you could be doing the best research of your life and go to present those results to your teammates with whom you have not built that inherent trust and they're gonna say, great, we don't really care. We have other data points that we can reference and we're just gonna do that. And so I think to be able to share that with people that I manage and the importance of relationship management that's one of those lessons that I think is just so critical to helping others achieve the success that they're striving for.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So for other people, other researchers that may be watching today, what are some practical things that they can do to help develop more trust outside of the research team?
- Phil Gordon:
- Absolutely. That's a great question. I think the number one thing is just having that level setting conversation with your teammates, explaining what it is that you do, why it is that you do it. Certainly highlighting the empathetic nature of research, especially qualitative research, how it differs from quantitative research how the two can come together to triangulate key insights. And I think that's just the beginning. That's just sort of the initial salvo. But from there, I think what's really important is to continue to think about relationships in much the same way that you would preparing for an interview with a participant thinking about what is it that I actually want to accomplish with this person that I'm chatting with? What is it that they're great at? How can I reference that to them and help them understand how much I appreciate what it is they do so that hopefully they also appreciate what it is I do.
- But I think continuing to just be prepared for conversations, which again, it's something we as researchers do constantly. We think about the questions that we want to ask, we think about the topics that we want to go into. We prepare a lot to ensure that the conversations that we have when the camera is on, go really smoothly. Putting that same level of care and preparation into the conversations that you have when the cameras are not on is an incredibly great way to ensure that you're actually building that trust and gendering that level of confidence that you're seeking to get from your stakeholders so that they know exactly what you're going to be able to do and they have no questions or reservations about it.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, this is such a great point Phil, and for those of you that are listening, I think this is something to really take on board and it's something that has been echoed in other conversations that we've had in the series, which is the role of the researcher is not just to research the user, there's also having that same level of empathy for the internal team and not assuming too much. I think that's also another key point that you've made is don't assume that everybody understands what it is that we do. It's almost like a assume a zero knowledge is your start point and build from there. Make sure you've got those basics. In your role, Phil, as a manager and a leader, really, you're leading a team of other researchers. What does success for you in that role mean?
- Phil Gordon:
- For me, truly success means that my reports are succeeding. They're achieving their objectives, not just in the short term, not just in terms of meeting their deliverable expectations and achieving good research, but that they're actually achieving that career success that they're striving for as well. And so I think about this from a situational leadership perspective, that there are sort of four situational leadership components, whether it's delegating, whether it's mentoring, whether it's directing or whether let's see, my fourth one is coaching, right? Yes, [laugh]. But it's about looking again at the different situations that you're presented with as a manager and saying, what is it that this person needs at this moment? And often what I'll do is ask my reports, what type of feedback are you looking for in this particular moment? And based on what they tell me, I can then of pivot and adjust my approach, my mentality to address what they're looking for. And if they don't know what they're looking for, I can, based on what they're telling me, try and give them what I think they might want. But I do this mostly by asking a lot of questions, which lo and behold is a practice we use as researchers. [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah. Isn't it great how you can actually manage both the team, manage the stakeholders, and manage the people that you're researching with a very similar set of tools. Now I really like that situational approach, those four buckets I think you had coaching, directing, mentoring, and what was the other
- Phil Gordon:
- One? And supporting
- Brendan Jarvis:
- And supporting that. That's like that.
- Phil Gordon:
- So delegating, sorry, delegating, delegating.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So I think those are really quite clear buckets to go to when you're faced with different situations, as you've said. And I think that's really handy for people again to take away from this conversation is that you can bring in these very simple frameworks for helping you have those conversations with your team members. How often would you say that operating? From the directing point of view?
- Phil Gordon:
- Probably not that often. Probably I'm more mentoring than anything else. And I think there's, delegation is also an incredibly important skill to learn. I think the most important thing about that is learning how to present a task to somebody in a way that they find appealing, that they find energizes them and gets them excited about the task. Because obviously nobody wants to be told what to do, [affirmative]. And so I think that finding that creative way to spin something so that the person receiving that is like, yes, this helps me achieve the goals that I'm striving for. It sounds like a really interesting topic, something I wanna sink my teeth into and I can see how this also ties into the objectives for the company, the product, et cetera. So yeah, I think that in the end directing is probably one of those tools that I use the least because that really is about telling other people what to do. And again, I've just found from my experience that is fraught with peril to say the least. [laugh]
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Brings back bad memories from being a child and not being able to get your way with your parents. So,
- Phil Gordon:
- Or even just working work. I was just gonna say, even just working with clients, if you tell a client what to do, the last thing that they want to do is what you suggest. But if you can help them come to that realization on their own, it's like that light bulb goes off and they're like, yes, this is what we want to do. This is the answer,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. Yeah. So really you want to use that directing bucket very sparingly, only go
- Phil Gordon:
- There very sparingly,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Have to tell me about leadership is often not always a bit of roses. Sometimes people don't do what is needed. Sometimes they fall short of the mark and there are various reasons for that. How do you approach the more difficult conversations that need to be had with your team?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, I think again, coming from a place of empathy is the starting point. I try and ensure that the conversations that I have with my team members are constantly based on empathy, regardless of whether it is a difficult conversation that we're having or just an everyday one-on-one, one casual chat. I really want to understand where people are coming from, what's going on in their lives beyond just the boundaries and the scope of work. Because turns out we do more in our lives than just work. And I embrace that. I know [laugh] I really do sort of believe in the mantra that we work to live, not live to work. And so I really try and understand what my reports are up to beyond just their day to day work lives. And so that makes having a conversation that it is more challenging if something isn't going according to plan, I can stop and say, Hey, seems like something's off here.
- Seems like things aren't going the way that we want them to. What's going on? And spend the time to really, really dig into is there something else is obviously covid is stressing people out in ways that they don't even realize. And so maybe that's something that's at play. It could be something that is just before you even start to think about it, you start having that conversation, you start to realize, oh, there's something there. And then there's an opportunity to dig more into that. So I think whenever having difficult conversations, just being forthright and candid and again empathetic, really trying to suspend judgment really trying to acknowledge this is what I'm perceiving, this is sort what I'm seeing coming from you. Let's talk more about that and giving again, that other person the opportunity to expand and share their feelings by a series of questions.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah. So it sounds like leading with empathy, again, it's a open questions, a genuine interest in what's going on for the other person, but also not being afraid to be direct in a candid way to address the issue as it's happening. Absolutely. I was having a conversation yesterday with a friend and colleague of mine and this somewhat similar topic came up and she has a great question that she asked herself, which is, what does love look like in this moment, [laugh]? And I really like that cuz I feel like if you can catch yourself in the moment where you might wanna jump into directing or you might wanna skip past the empathetic part of this process and just get straight into the candor, that having something like that to go to can be quite useful to make sure that you are leading in a way that works for both parties.
- Phil Gordon:
- Absolutely. I 100% agree with that. And I think that one of the things we haven't discussed is I have a two and a half year old child and he goes through a lot of emotions very quickly, and I think that he has taught me a great deal about looking at situations and saying, I could very easily just yell at you right now, but that's not going to accomplish anything. I don't mean to imply that being a manager is the equivalent of being a parent, but I think that there are a lot of similarities and there are a lot of overlaps. And so I am grateful to him for everything that he has taught me in his very brief period of time on Earth in terms of looking at situations with that lens that it sounds like your friend was mentioning of what does love look like in this situation? Because again, I've found that in order to get him to do the things I want him to do, coming at him with love is far more effective than coming at him with anger.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. Yes, a hundred percent agree. I also have a two and a half year old son and yeah, it's so true. I think what it has meant for me as a manager and as a leader is it's forced me to slow down and think about other ways of approaching things, which is difficult to do if you are running low on sleep. So [laugh] definitely children, they make you look at the world a different way. Phil, you were going to give some advice to unsolicited, but let's do it anyway. To someone that's in UX research that's either been given management or leadership responsibilities for their team or is looking to take those on, what would you say to them?
- Phil Gordon:
- I would say look at it in much the same way that you developed new skills over the course of your UX career whether you're a researcher, whether you're a designer, or whether you're something else in UX or maybe even just in product that when I first started my career, to me usability was the end all and be all. I wanted products to be usable. That felt like that was what I was trying to achieve. And I come to realize after a while that usability is really just table stakes, that there is so much more to that and achieving success. We've talked about setting expectations building engagement and I think the real pinnacle is even trying to achieve some sort of loyalty. But we'll table that for a moment. The point I'm raising though is that I went into my career with this perception, this expectation that what I was trying to achieve was usability.
- Over time I started to realize that I could do so much more than that. I could also start to do generative and discovery research that would help create products that didn't even exist yet. And that was an entirely new set of lessons and skills that I had to develop. And honestly, I didn't really get to that point until I was probably four or five years into my career. I really spent the beginning of my career just doing usability testing. Then I spent the next phase of my career really getting to understand what does discovery research look like? When are the best times to use discovery research? How can I get the most from discovery research? And then how can I ensure that the clients for whom I'm doing this work actually appreciate it and integrate it into their thinking as well as we were just discussing.
- And so I think those same sort of lessons apply to becoming a manager that it's a process of learning. I acknowledge that I am now two years into my career as a manager. I am just scratching the surface on what it truly means to be a great manager. That said, I've seen a lot of great examples of bad management over the course of my career [laugh]. So there are a lot of things I know not to do, but I think that's also one of the challenges is trying to find those examples to either emulate or to say that's an example of how I don't want to go about doing something. And so I think that it's just that same process of developing a skill set, honing practicing, and again, acknowledging that it's okay to make mistakes so long as you're growing and learning from them.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, a hundred percent. So we've touched on this earlier in our conversation, and again, it's a sort management focused question, but when you get to the position that you have and you're responsible for a team, you start to engage with a more senior level in the business with people that are also responsible for other areas. What does it look like? Effective management either across or up to more senior stakeholders? How do you approach that?
- Phil Gordon:
- Again, I think it's all about coming prepared, understanding what is it that this person is looking to achieve, acknowledging that the higher somebody goes in the hierarchy of a business, the less time they have to really sink their teeth and their attention into the minutia of certain decisions. And so acknowledging what is the level of summary what is the level of information that I want to deliver to this person? And based on my experience working with them, how do they tend to receive information? Am I best served by creating a highlight reel? Am I best served by just putting together a couple of slides that point to the key learnings from something that we've just gathered? So again, it's all about preparation. It's all about taking what you've previously gleaned and gathered and applying that to the particular situation. And I think that if done effectively, I know this sounds like a lot of work, but it actually, I think shortcuts the total level of effort because you're not having to chase your tail following up with somebody time and time again to help them understand you're hitting them with information one time, but doing it in a way that really ensures that it finds the right audience, the right receptors in that person, and then you can move on to whatever it else it is you need to be doing. [laugh].
- Yeah.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah. So it sounds like think about the other person, what motivates them, what's driving them, the pressures that they have on them, tailor what you are putting to them to suit how they make decisions, because ultimately it will lead to quicker decision making and less stress and effort on your part. I think that, again, that's a really, really key point. I remember reading something recently and the point that was being made is that the value of your insights should have an inverse relationship with how long you spend explaining them. And I think there's often a tendency and research for us to feel like we've done all this work here, it all is, but it's not always what people need to make decisions from. Yep.
- Phil Gordon:
- I 100% agree with that [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So Phil, tell me, outside of the UX research team or teams within Spotify, who else, what other parts of the business are you most closely working with?
- Phil Gordon:
- So for some context sound better is basically a business within a business. So this is an acquisition that Spotify made end of 2019 October, I wanna say. So it's been just over a year. And one of the really unique things about it is that we are basically a startup within this larger organization. And the goal I think in acquiring sound better from Spotify was to integrate with what they call Spotify for artists. Spotify for artists is a suite of tools that basically give the artists that we know and love and listen to data insights, the ability to understand what kind of impact is my music having in terms of engagement with the Spotify audience. And so sound better is meant to be an opportunity for artists who are looking to collaborate, who maybe don't have all of the sort available collaborators that they would wanna work with at their disposal, be able to go out and hire somebody.
- So it could be a singer songwriter who is looking to hire a producer. Now of course, a major label artist probably has somebody that major label is going to recommend for them, but we're talking about more independent artists who don't have this stable of people that they can just call on at the drop of a hat. And so I think the real goal of integrating sound better into this Spotify for artist community is to ensure that basically everybody is operating at something of the same level. Now, of course, again, a major label artist is going to have a different budget, a different set of opportunities in terms of how their music is marketed, how back when touring was a thing they could go out on tour, all of these things. But right now the play feel is pretty level in that there is no touring. And so I think it's a really interesting time for artists to be exploring this collaboration space because there are so many unique tools like Sound Better out there, allowing this kind of thing to happen when maybe even five years ago it wasn't possible [affirmative]. So I think that's sort of how this all integrates together. So I work very closely with this Spotify for artist team.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Right, right. And are product managers a group that you are engaged with regularly?
- Phil Gordon:
- Absolutely. So we have three product managers within sound better, and then I can't even count how many product managers just within close proximity to us within what we call the marketplace business unit. So yeah, some product managers or somebody who I'm engaging with constantly.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, I was curious about this and it's something that I have been wanting to explore through this interview series is the relationship between UXr and product management. So this is kind of quite an open question, we'll just see where it goes, but in your observation working with product managers, what is it that they really care about and what is it that they want from Uxr?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, I think what they want is similar to what everybody wants, which is that confidence to make the right decision. I think we're all constantly looking for that signal, that data, whatever it might be, that insight that tells us, oh absolutely, yes, definitively this is the way to go. Unfortunately, that doesn't happen all that often. And I think that what the beauty of the relationship between UX research and product management is that it does help them start to understand some of the why at Spotify. As you mentioned, I also manage a data scientist and product insights at Spotify is this collaboration between UX research and data science. This is triangulation, data science tells us a great deal about the world that has already happened, but we're often building products and features for the world that we want to exist in the future. And so I think that the real value, especially for product managers through research is getting that opportunity to understand, well, why might this be successful or why might it not be successful?
- We can certainly go and AB test, we can certainly go and generate more data once we've decided to launch a feature, but there's really not a lot of great data out there that currently exists that will tell us, again, definitively, yes, this is going to work or no, it's not going to work. And again, I think that's where research comes into play that I can go and empathize, go and understand by looking through the eyes of somebody else, of my actual users, how are they going to potentially use this feature? How are they going to potentially use this product? And based on what I now know about that as a product manager, I can then go and work with all the other people that I interface with to help them understand. And so I've long thought that the crucial component between research and product management is that ability for product managers to inherently understand what is it the research is telling us because they're going and engaging in so many other conversations where researchers really aren't there. If they can take those key learnings and turn them around and trumpet them themselves, it evangelizes, it makes the work of UX research so much more impactful. And so that's long thought that if we can convince the product managers of the opportunities through research, we we've at least taken a huge step towards success. And then hopefully that success will continue to manifest through the conversations that they continue to have.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah. Look, that was such a great summary. You've touched on some really important points. You've touched on the ability for the researcher to provide greater context and therefore confidence into the decision making process that the product manager is often in charge of. You've also talked about the importance of triangulation. And again, this is something, this is for those of you listening, this is a really important thing that comes up in these conversations and it's great to hear it coming up again. And that's that relationship between the more quantitative data science, the what's already happened with the soft and more qualitative UX research of what might happen. And I really love the way that you described that because I think that's such an important marrying of those two worlds, the world that has been in the world that we want to create. I think that's fantastic. Now talking about the quantitative side of things a little bit more. So it seems to me that there's almost a greater confidence that decision makers and other stakeholders place in the quantitative, the data science over and above the qualitative aspects of what it is that we do. What has been your experience there? And if you've encountered that what is it that you believe drives that overconfidence in the numbers of what's happened before?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, I think most people in who have been in their UX career for a period of time have encountered that experience to some degree or other that the numbers seem to be the holy grailed. There's some reverence given to the numbers. And one of the things I think that's interesting about this is that if you look at some of the fields within UX design UX writing, even product management, and then of course data science as an observer or as somebody who doesn't do one of those roles, to look at somebody who does one of those roles is almost like looking at magic. It's like, wow, I don't know how they did that, but that was incredible. They were able to produce these great dashboards, or the writing was fantastic and it helped convert the customers that we wanted to convert or whatever it is. They took the design and they made it from scratch.
- And I think the opposite is true of UX research, that when people look at UX research, they're like, wow, that just seems so easy. I mean, all he did was a conversation with somebody like anybody could do that [laugh]. And so I find that when it comes to feedback, there's often a tendency for non researchers to want to tell researchers, Hey, you're not doing this enough, or I think you could be asking these questions, or I think you could be doing this. Or When that person said this thing, why didn't you ask that particular question? And I think it's just so much easier to look at UX research and say, oh, it seems so simple and so straightforward. And so I think that there is just something, again, this sense of magic that exists with numbers that if you can show me a dashboard an analytics report, something that tells me that this is where we've come from, and if we continue to extrapolate, this is where we might go, well, that sounds great.
- Let's up to the right. Yeah, let's aim for that. Whereas as a researcher, we're often kind of bringing a little bit of bad news, Hey, we went out and put this design in front of some people and they liked some of it and some of it seemed to work really well, but some of it, the other parts of it didn't work so well. So we're probably gonna need to reinvestigate our thinking here. Well, that's kind of a buzz. I really wanted it to work. So you're telling me that you're gonna rate on my parade and tell me that it's not gonna work. We have to rethink that. I don't want to do that. So I think that's a little bit of the discrepancy between research and especially a role like data science when it comes to compelling and creating that narrative within the minds of those who were trying to ultimately convince [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So what can we do as user researchers to build more confidence?
- Phil Gordon:
- I think the number one thing is getting stakeholders involved in research, helping them start to see what it actually looks like, not just to come and observe a session or two, but to truly maybe even try their hand at a research session, discover that lo and behold, it's not so easy to just have a conversation with somebody that you're trying to think about the question you want to ask two questions in advance while also capturing the feedback that somebody is giving you right now while also actively listening to what they're saying so that the next thing you say doesn't sound like a bunch of gibberish.
- I think that by developing that empathy within our stakeholders, within those with whom we work closely, there's a great opportunity to showcase the challenges of UX research, but then also the opportunities that it does create. Again, the beauty in my mind of research is that we don't have to go out and boil the ocean. We don't have to look at every possible data point. We can do a short series of conversations, learn from that, and then go back and use that to inform our thinking and follow that up with another round long described UX research as almost like a infinity in golf. I'm not a golfer, so bear with me here, but imagine a hole in golf where you are never actually going to get to the goal, but you're always striving to get closer. You're always striving to say, in that last shot I was off a bit, and now that I'm looking at where I want to go, I realize I need to pivot almost 45 degrees or 90 degrees or sometimes even 180 degrees to now achieve that next shot.
- That gets me closer to what I'm trying to go for. And I think that when you start to appreciate that, when you realize that research is not just a one and done, oh yeah, we went and did that and it told us a little bit, and now we're just gonna move on to something else, you realize that it's actually this cyclical process. That's where people start to get that aha moment and say, oh, alright, I'm gonna build on what I previously knew and understood, and then I'm going to continue to advance my knowledge by doing that process over and over again.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, I love it how empathy has come up. Again, in this context, it was have the stakeholders have some empathy for the researchers by putting them in the hot seat of being the moderator or the interviewer, and get an experience of just how tricky it is to guide these kind conversations to places where you can find insights. Now I know you've recently given a talk at UX New Zealand, which was held a week or two ago, and that was exploring this difference between empathy and sympathy for your users. What is the distinction between those two things?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, so let me start by saying that in doing this presentation, I had paid a lot of lip service to this particular topic over the course of my career. As long as I've already discussed, I've gone into conversations with colleagues to help level set expectations. What is it that I do as a researcher? Well, I help build empathy, but I'd never actually taken the time to explore that difference between empathy and sympathy. And there were a series of events recently within my team that led me to say, I think it's important. I think it's beyond important. I think it's critical that I help my team start to understand the differences between empathy and sympathy, because I think that if we make sympathetic decisions, we're doing ourselves and our customers a disservice. And so I went and sat down and really started to dig into the research and was blown away.
- It was really floored by, again, having spoken to this for so long, what these differences really are. And I came across a great presentation by BNE Brown highly recommend just Googling her and listening to some of her thoughts on this topic. She does a fantastic job of concisely sort of illustrating these differences. But one of the things that I was really amazed to learn was that sympathy is born from the idea that I'm looking at you, I'm seeing you and your discomfort, I, I'm uncomfortable looking at your discomfort. I don't want to feel that way anymore. So I want you to stop being uncomfortable so that I can stop being uncomfortable looking at you. So it's not about making you feel better, it's just about making myself feel better because you don't look uncomfortable anymore. [affirmative], I was floored by that. I was also fascinated to learn that sympathy comes from sort this paternalistic condescension that I know better.
- It's almost, it's the hubris that I've long been battling as a researcher. And empathy is about building connection. And so one of the things that I really came away from this research understanding is that just like yoga is a practice, empathy is a practice, sympathy is just a reaction. It's like laughing or snorting or [laugh], whatever reaction you might have to somebody saying something, it's just the first thing that comes to mind. But sympathy is about suspending judgment. It's about acknowledging what it is that you see in front of you. And then it's about talking through that and saying, look, seems to me, or I'm acknowledging, or as I start to understand where you're coming from, these are the things that I'm actually perceiving. And just using that as a starting point and that achieving empathy, I think takes a great deal of time. Again, like yoga, you're never actually done with it but sympathy. You just do it and then you move on from it, and it doesn't actually drive connection. It even drives disconnection. And those were some of the most incredible learnings through this research. And then to put together this presentation for UX New Zealand, just continue to drive these ideas home for me, it was a really great experience.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So taking this notion of sympathy versus empathy and applying that back to the product context, how does sympathy in tangible terms, how does it lead to disconnection in the experience? How does it change the decisions or what does it make the decisions look like?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, and I think we've all seen this, whether we knew what we were seeing or not, but sympathy is about those knee jerk reactions. Again, like I said, it's a reaction. It's seeing something and allowing yourself to do the very first thing that comes to mind. So more often than not, this takes the form of if somebody says to you, oh, I'm experiencing some pain or some heartache or something challenging in my life, the first thing that we often want to do is say, well, yeah, I mean, I've experienced something like that too. That must mean that we we're connected. When in reality, all you're doing is diminishing the other person's experience by making it about you. Just as I was saying, empathy, again, it's like there's a trend here. Empathy is about asking questions. It's about trying to understand more where is this person coming from?
- What is actually troubling about this experience that they're having? What can I potentially do to help them, if anything? And in fact, there may not be anything that you can do to help them in that moment, but by taking the time to truly start to dig into the needs, the motivations of whether it's the person you're talking to or the customers for whom you're building products, you can then start to achieve success by ensuring that you're doing the right things for the right reasons, and thinking about those long term successes that you're aiming for, rather than just trying to achieve success in that moment of, well, I don't feel uncomfortable anymore. So hooray,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. Yeah, yeah. I believe, and it's glad to hear you mention this notion of the long term because that implies that there's a short term as well, a short term in the way in which you can make decisions. What's an example of a decision that may come from a place of sympathy that may be bad for users in the short term but ultimately there's a better long term solution that lives in empathy?
- Phil Gordon:
- I'll use an example that I spoke about in my presentation years ago. I was working as a consultant for a bank, and this is a very, very high end bank. They only have millionaire clients at the very least and they revere their clients to the utmost their clients are gods to them, at least the way they talk about it. And they couldn't possibly fathom the idea of their clients taking part in UX research to start to build a better product for their needs as customers. And we're specifically talking about the app that they were using just to do their everyday banking. And so rather than allowing my team to have some just very candid conversations with their clients, we were given the financial advisors as proxies to talk to and they could tell us what their clients needed. And ultimately what it came down to is they were fearful of making significant changes to their product experience.
- They basically wanted the app to stay the same forever. And yet, as we started to have more of these conversations, especially at a certain level, we came to realize that their customers were in fact quite frustrated because were, I mean, this is literally just a couple of years ago, we were just building the ability to take a photo of a check and deposit it into your account. Now, that feature has been around on most banking apps for years, and it did not exist for these people again, very high end clients who you would think have the creme creme of features within their app. And so that to me is a perfect example of sympathy, of feeling like, oh, well, we don't want to change anything on our clients because they might not like that. So let's just keep everything the same forever and they'll be happy with that. And lo and behold, that's a great way to ensure that your clients are in fact not happy at all.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah, that sounds really, really, really risky. I wanted to just quickly loop back before we wrap up to something that you mentioned earlier, which was this notion that UX research is more difficult than it might be perceived to be, but there is this perception out there that anybody can do it. It seems like we don't really ask non-developers to then all of a sudden start committing code to a production repository the same way that we wouldn't of any other profession. But there also seems to be this openness that we have as UX researchers to invite people into the practice and to have a go at it. Where does this openness work for us? And where doesn't it?
- Phil Gordon:
- That's a great question. I was thinking about this a little bit as I was preparing for the interview, and I was reflecting on the fact that as a field UX research seems to have this expectation built in that we do share a great deal of information with one another, that we update each other on our best practices. And I was thinking about other fields, and I was thinking, do rocket scientists share best practices with one another? I can't imagine that they do. They're probably all in pretty close, like competition with one another, trying to achieve the best outcomes for their various rockets. And so I think it's interesting that our field has this expectation baked into it already. And I think that by embracing that, we do ourselves a tremendous service. Give a quick other example, tangent here. I once was doing research for a credit union, and I don't, do they have credit unions in New Zealand?
- Yes. Yep. Okay. Alright. [laugh]. And was fascinating to learn that credit unions are more than happy to share information with one another, assuming that the other credit union is not down the street and you're not competing for the exact same customer. A credit union on one side of the country is more than happy to share information with a credit union on the other side of the country. That to me, was fascinating. And I think there's a lot of similarities there between that and UX research that we're typically not all competing for the same customers. Now, of course, maybe Twitter and Facebook aren't gonna go and share their research with one another, but generally we all are hoping to help customers achieve their goals, reduce their frustrations, meet their needs. And so I think that there's a lot that just aligns us as researchers in terms of the goals that we're trying to accomplish.
- Now where I, this doesn't work so well for us is there are times where we might come up against a very particular, I've long questioned what is appropriate for me to go out and share in terms of specific data that I have gathered about some of the research that I have done. And that uncertainty, I think makes it really hard to decide is this appropriate to share or not, maybe years later. Sure. But I think there's something about the actual data that we're gathering that, yeah, we probably just shouldn't be sharing because it's potentially harmful if somebody else were to get ahold of it and use it for some other nefarious purpose. So I think it's this interesting balance that we have to strike within our community of sharing how to approach the practice of UX research, ways in which that we have either failed and learn from our mistakes or achieve success and learn from that as well without going into those fine grain details of, okay, well then I boosted conversion by X percent by employing this thing. So I just think that it, it's imperative that we find the balance to ensure that we are protecting the ip, but also driving the practice forward. I feel like that was a convoluted answer. [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Good to get your perspective on that. Phil, thinking ahead, given what you've seen so far in your time in the field, what does UX research look like in 2030?
- Phil Gordon:
- 2030? I think that it still looks very similar in a lot of ways. I've been incredibly impressed with how technology has helped me as a researcher conduct my practice. Thinking back, not even six years ago, eight years ago, some of the remote collaboration tools, the Zoom interview that we're having right now, this would not have been as seamless. It would've been fractured, and one of us probably would've dropped off at a certain point and had to dial back in
- [laugh]. But I've long felt that remote collaboration tools like this are an important part of UX research because I know that it allows me to extend my scope, extend the reach of my research infinitely. I can have conversations with people in other parts of the world that if I were to spend the time traveling to those places, the ROI just wouldn't be there. But I can have that conversation from my home, my couch, wherever [laugh]. And I've even heard you talking about remote unmoderated tools with some of your interviewees as well. I'm a big fan of remote unmoderated tools used in the right circumstances, done for very lightweight usability testing. Just trying to answer a couple of key questions so that the session is no more than maybe five to 10 minutes. They're not the right tools to try and start a product from scratch. Please don't use them for that.
- But there are great instances to use tools like that. And so I'm fascinated to see how the proliferation of these types of tools continues to drive us forward as a practice. But I also think, and I can't remember which of your interviewees was mentioning this, there is an inherently human element that AI will not replace us as researchers. Empathy I don't think is something that AI can really develop. And I think that that is the crucial ingredient to our work as researchers, that in having a conversation, we need to be able to understand what is this person experiencing right now? How do I continue to have the right conversation? How do I continue to ask the right questions? How do I continue to build upon the information that this person has taken the time to share with me? And then how can I help go and turn that information into Insight [affirmative]?
- And so I think that we will continue to benefit from new technology as researchers. I think that it is going to mean that we are able to conduct our research even faster, that recruiting becomes even easier. I use a tool these days called, which allows me to basically marry a video and the transcript, I was gonna recommend this to you. I think you'll find a lot of value in it but it basically allows me to create video clips in a matter of minutes. I used to spend hours doing that, so I think that all of this means that we are going to be able to move a lot faster as researchers. And that there have been times in my career where I have heard the complaint that research slows things down. Now, of course, I don't believe it, but I think that we will be able to demonstrate to a much broader audience in a very short period of time that no research doesn't slow anything down. In fact, if you're not doing research, you are, you're slowing yourself down. That research can actually help speed everything up tremendously. So that's where I see us going in the next 10 years. [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Yeah. Right. I think removing that objection through smart use of technology is a really important point. And also what you've said, you know, basically said that our superpower is our ability to use empathy and the tools available to us to help people make smarter decisions and take that risk out of their product process. Are you up for playing a quick game before we
- Phil Gordon:
- Absolutely.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Okay. So if you've watched the previous episodes in the series, you may be familiar with what this game is called. It's called, what's the first word that comes to mind? It's really simple. I'm gonna say a word. Your brain will automatically think of a word, and then you'll just tell me what that word is.
- Phil Gordon:
- Sounds good. I'm ready.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Okay. The first word is sympathy,
- Phil Gordon:
- Disconnection,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Leadership,
- Phil Gordon:
- Mentoring,
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. And the last word is wooing.
- Phil Gordon:
- [laugh]. Character building.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- [laugh]. Yeah. You mentioned shoveling shovel, shoveling poh for a tractor, and anyone had to do that. That's obviously character building stuff.
- Phil Gordon:
- Yes. How my dad would describe that [laugh].
- Brendan Jarvis:
- So Phil, why do you continue to try and bring more empathy into design and product decisions in a world that is full of big data and increasing levels of automation?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, I think that's a pretty easy one for me. I was most excited when I first got into research because my mom is the kind of person who is inherently fearful of pressing the wrong button, of doing the wrong thing on every interface that she uses. And so pretty much all products that I work on build, contribute to. I'm constantly thinking about how would my mom engage with this? Is this something that would make it easier for my mom to understand? And so I just embrace the idea of making people's lives, even if it's doing something that they are just doing for fun, even if it's something that they're only doing for 30 seconds. If I can help make somebody's life just that much easier, reduce their frustration, help address some of their challenges and meet their needs, that brings me so much joy.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Thanks, Phil. That's a really great place for us to wrap up. I've really enjoyed today's conversation. It's been great having you on the show. Thank you for so generously sharing your experiences and your knowledge and all the stories that you've shared with us today.
- Phil Gordon:
- Thank you so much for having me. It's really been a pleasure.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- I'm sure that our community's gonna get a lot of value out of the conversation that we've had, and we're really trying to, I suppose, share these stories with the community so that we can build better and more human products. And it was funny talking you talking about your mum, because I was that guy as well in my family. And if I can help remove some of that frustration, then it will be a life well lived. What's the best way for people to connect with you if they want to keep in touch with what you're up to or just to say thank you for sharing your knowledge?
- Phil Gordon:
- Yeah, absolutely. LinkedIn is probably the best place I heard all of the previous interviewees, and they all have books and all sorts of other channels and websites. And I'll be honest when I'm not working, I'm typically doing something else. And so LinkedIn is a great resource for finding me, connecting with me. I've updated my profile image, so I actually look like me as opposed to a random avatar. [laugh]. Yeah, it's a great place to get started.
- Brendan Jarvis:
- Oh, good. Well, to just for everyone, we'll definitely be posting Phil's LinkedIn link in the show notes. Thanks again, Phil. And thanks to everyone who else who has tuned in, it's been great having you. Everything that we've covered today, including a full breakdown of the topics and in the chapters for the video will be posted and we to find Phil. If you enjoyed the show and you wanna hear more of these great conversations with UX researchers, world class UX researchers and product management professionals, don't forget to the video, leave a comment and subscribe to the channel. And until next time, keep being brave everyone. I'll just stop now. Where's the stop button?