Week 3 Worked Example: Research & Empathy
Step 1: User Named
Step 2: Secondary Research (15 minutes)
Looked at three existing desk organisers and one tidy-desk article. Notes saved:
- Most organisers assume a large, permanent desk. Priya's desk is small and shared.
- Most hide tools in drawers. One article noted people forget tools they cannot see.
- Standard pen pots tip over easily when knocked.
Step 3 to 4: Interviews Conducted
Two interviews of about 10 minutes each: Priya, and Sam, a first year on the same course. Consent taken, names anonymised, written notes only.
Real quotes captured
- Priya: "I lose the first twenty minutes just clearing space before I can start."
- Priya: "If it is not in front of me, I forget I own it. I bought a second ruler once for no reason."
- Sam: "My pens live in a mug and it tips over about once a week."
- Sam: "I pack everything away because my flatmate uses the desk too, so nothing has a home."
Step 5: Completed Empathy Map
| SAYS | "I lose the first twenty minutes clearing space." "If it is not in front of me, I forget I own it." |
|---|---|
| DOES | Stacks sketchbooks on the floor. Keeps pens in a mug. Packs everything away after each session. |
| THINKS | "Setup is wasted time." "The desk is not really mine to keep set up." |
| FEELS | Frustrated at the start of each session. Slightly embarrassed about buying duplicate tools. |
| PAINS | Setup time before work can begin. Forgotten and duplicated tools. Shared desk with no fixed home for anything. |
| GAINS | Wants to sit down and start within a minute. Wants the most used tools visible. Wants something portable that packs away fast. |
Step 6: Three Insight Statements
- I noticed that the real cost is not mess, it is the setup and pack-away time around every session.
- I was surprised that visibility beats storage. Hidden tools get forgotten and even bought twice.
- I wonder if a portable tray that keeps the five most used tools visible and moves in one lift would fit a shared desk better than a fixed organiser.
Why This Passes
- The user is named and realistic, with a specific context (small, shared desk, evening sessions).
- Research is primary: two real interviews plus observation, backed by quick secondary research.
- Evidence uses real quotes and observed behaviour, kept separate from opinion.
- The insights come straight from the evidence and stop short of designing the final product.
Weak Versus Strong
Weak version
"People want a nicer desk organiser. It should look good and have lots of storage. I think a big box with many compartments would be best."
Why it fails: no named user, no interviews, opinion presented as fact, and it jumps straight to a solution ("a big box") with no evidence behind it.
Strong version
The full example above: named user, real quotes, an empathy map that separates doing from saying, and insights that point toward a direction ("visible, portable, fast to pack away") without locking in the final design.
Architecture And Spatial Track Note
The same method produces this for the learning pod project. Named user: a volunteer who runs weekend art sessions in a small community hall. Observed behaviour: attendees crowd the one window for light and avoid the dark back corner; forty minutes of every session is spent setting up and packing away tables. Insight: "I wonder if a fold-out pod that arrives pre-set with light and storage would give back the forty minutes now lost to setup." Evidence source: one interview with the volunteer plus photos of the real hall.