“Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me”
But of course they do. And they also hurt our work.
The words we choose to use can be the difference between understanding and confusion.
Take ‘User Research’, for example:
- For me, User Research is a single term I can use to encapsulate the requirement to find out more about the needs and behaviours of people who are, or you want to be, using your website (or app, software, etc.).
- I can also refer to User Research as a collective term for the methodologies used to establish the above, which includes observational interviews, diary studies, co-design workshops, etc.
- User Research is also how I refer to a single service we provide at EUX. I differentiate between Usability Testing (to test a website for usability and user experience issues) and User Research (to understand customers as users), though the methodology looks similar and most of our projects include both.
- And then it is used as a phase in our User-Centred Design Framework: User Research > Information Architecture > Creative Design.
Confused yet?
On a recent UX webinar the speakers continually referred to ‘Generative’ and ‘Evaluative’ research, and a small part of me died. More terminology in an attempt to magnify ‘UX’. I can’t help feel for all the newer UX people trying to navigate their careers. It is an incomplete maze.
For the past two decades UX people have shared their frustration that they struggle to get buy-in internally, struggle to get UX on the table, and struggle to do as much user research and usability testing as they know will truly help.
I believe a big part of this is the lack of consistent language.
Is it impacting the role of UX?
The result is that many UX roles no longer focus on User Research and Usability Testing, but on rounds and rounds of micro tasks and data analysis, on experimentation and continual tweaks, on reactive and oft changing priorities – chasing tails for mini gains.
Eventually someone pops their head up and notices, “we need to do some proper user research”.
This language dissolution has real world consequences. When we can’t clearly communicate the value of fundamental UX practices, they are easily side-lined. The further we drift into specialised terminology, the more disconnected we become from the core work of understanding users.
What began as a terminology problem has transformed into a practice problem—pushing many UX professionals away from the core research activities that drive meaningful long-term improvements.
What words should we use?
Unsurprisingly we look to UX to help us. When you are providing products and services to an audience of users and customers (internal or external) it is not the language you use that matters, but the language they use, and the terminology that is natural for them.
Our (UX people) role is not to solve the UX ‘industry’ challenges, but to improve the user experience for the people that need the end product or service.
This matters, not only in what we call our products and services, but how they are categorised and labelled.
So if ‘generative’ and ‘evaluative’ works for your stakeholders, fantastic. Just be ready and willing to adapt when you move to a new organisation.
And how do you go about understanding the words and phrases your customers use?
Well, that will need ‘User Research’ – doh!
You might also be interested in reading:
