Template preview · Software
UX research plan
Run focused research that answers a product decision.
A practical plan for moderated research.
Sample purpose
Run focused research that answers a product decision.
Audience: UX researcher, Product designer- Structure
- 4 sections
- Criteria
- 14
- Sources
- 8
- Watches
- 4
- Default approach
- Review first
Set the purpose first. Then change every section, criterion, and agent setting before anything runs.
Fictional sample
Structure and criteria
Sample content shows the shape of a useful document. Copying it is optional.
01 Review firstResearch question
Focus the study on a decision the team must make.
Criteria
- Names the product decision the team is blocked on
- The primary question cannot be answered by agreeing with a design
- Each supporting question tests a different part of the decision
Sources
- Nielsen Norman: how many test users nngroup.comLinks question scope to feasible sample size.
- Pine Ledger product decision log (fictional) api.pineledger.exampleThe open decision this research must unblock.
Sample content
Can freelance bookkeepers set a reminder rule for overdue invoices without mistaking it for an automatic payment action?
02 Review firstParticipants
Define who can answer the question and how many sessions are needed.
Criteria
- Inclusion criteria describe relevant experience (sends invoices monthly), not job titles
- States a sample size with a reason (6 for patterns in moderated sessions)
- Excludes employees and heavy power users
- Recruitment source is described without names or contact details
Sources
- Nielsen Norman: how many test users nngroup.comSample-size rationale for qualitative sessions.
- Pine Ledger recruitment panel (fictional) api.pineledger.exampleScreener counts by segment.
Watches
- Follows Research question
Sample content
- ☑ Six freelance bookkeepers who send invoices monthly
- ☑ At least two people using a non-Pine Ledger tool
- ☑ Exclude current Pine Ledger employees
03 Review firstSession guide
Make activities consistent while allowing follow-up questions.
Criteria
- Each prompt is neutral (what do you expect to happen) and implies no correct answer
- Observation prompts for the facilitator are separate from questions to ask
- States total session time and a time budget per task
- Task uses a realistic invoice case, such as one 10 days late
Sources
- Nielsen Norman: affinity diagram nngroup.comHow observations will later be grouped, to shape what the guide captures.
- Pine Ledger prototype notes (fictional) api.pineledger.exampleCurrent prototype flow the task runs on.
Watches
- Follows Participants
Sample content
Phase Prompt Task Set a reminder for an invoice that is 10 days late. Reflection What did you expect to happen next? 04 Review firstAnalysis plan
Define how observations become a recommendation.
Criteria
- Analysis starts after all sessions, with tagging kept apart from interpretation
- Names the decision meeting by date and roles, not people
- Defines a trigger for deeper synthesis (e.g. 4 of 6 mistake reminders for payment)
Sources
- Nielsen Norman: affinity diagram nngroup.comMethod for grouping raw observations.
- Thematic analysis in qualitative research (PubMed Central) pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.govProcess for coding without pre-committing to findings.
Watches
- Follows Research question
- Follows Session guide
Sample content
- 2026-03-03 · Sessions completeTag patterns and exceptions.
- 2026-03-06 · Decision reviewShare recommendation with product trio.