Several years ago, I was working on a product that needed attention from the software product teams. This is a natural part of a product’s lifecycle—a user’s needs evolve, features must be added, and bugs inevitably occur. The project was large enough that our team decided gathering insights directly from real users would be ideal. We scheduled in-person and phone interviews (this was before Zoom became popular). A subject matter expert (SME) from our team asked if they could “listen in.” Although this wasn’t our usual practice, we agreed.

The first interview started well—for the first five minutes. During the session, our SME chimed in, offering unsolicited advice on how the participant should use the product to streamline their workflow. “Oh, no, no—you should do it this way and tap here instead,” she said. And so it continued.

Afterward, we had a conversation with the SME to clarify the purpose of user interviews. These are not training sessions—they are opportunities to understand how users actually interact with the product. If users feel corrected rather than heard, we lose valuable insights.

Our best intentions can sometimes get in the way. Listening is hard. But when we listen with intent, we can better understand the problems and challenges that need solving—a valuable life lesson, too. With that in mind, I’ve compiled a list of common research mistakes I’ve encountered (and made) during software projects, along with tips to avoid them.

Mistake #1: Skipping Research Entirely

This is the most common mistake. Research is often skipped because it seems overwhelming, expensive, or time-consuming. Teams are under pressure—deadlines loom, competitors release features faster, and it’s easy to assume, “We know what our users need.”

This mindset often arises in teams that have been using the software for years. Confirmation bias creeps in: “I don’t experience issues, so no one else does either.” Leadership then assumes there are no problems—or they believe they already know how to solve them. However, this perspective ignores the day-to-day experience of typical users. As an admin or power user, you’re too familiar with the inner workings and workarounds. What about new hires? Are you going to train every new user on the system’s quirks? That’s costly and inefficient.

Avoiding Mistake #1
Research doesn’t have to be overwhelming. Start by asking, “Who can provide feedback on how a feature is performing?” Then, make sure those participants are real-world users, not internal staff. Gather feedback and document it—surveys are a great starting point.

While research for large organizations can be expensive, smaller companies don’t need a massive budget. Consider the cost of rework if a feature flops. A 2017 DORA study found that small to mid-sized companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars annually on “technical rework.” Proper research helps avoid this fate and can directly impact ROI by identifying affordable solutions to user issues.

Mistake #2: Involving the Wrong People

Even the best intentions can derail a project if the wrong people are involved—or if they’re involved at the wrong time.

Don’t recruit SMEs or internal stakeholders for user research (at least not initially). While their feedback is valuable, they know too much about the system. Their input can skew the results and miss the real-world perspective you need. I see this often when kicking off new projects; I ask for users, but what I get are internal employees or decision-makers. They’re great to talk to, just not for user interviews.

Avoiding Mistake #2
Define your desired outcomes, select the right research methods, and recruit participants accordingly. I also create a list of people I don’t want to be involved Nothing against them; they’re not the right fit right now.

Focus on non-expert users—those who encounter the good, bad, and ugly of the software. These individuals may be quieter, but with the right approach, they’ll provide a wealth of insights. Also, include users on the other end of the spectrum, such as new employees or those who only use part of the platform.

Mistake #3: Fixating on the Wrong Problems

“I’ve been frustrated by this feature for years; we need to fix it!” I’ve heard this many times. While these issues may be valid, prioritizing them without a strategic roadmap can lead to inefficiency. It’s easy to let passion projects overshadow what’s truly important.

The “tyranny of the urgent” often takes over—fires pop up, demanding immediate attention. While resolving these issues may feel productive, they rarely improve the software’s overall efficiency, functionality, or user satisfaction.

Avoiding Mistake #3
Software problems typically fall into three categories: desirability (what users want), viability (what benefits the business), and feasibility (what’s technically possible).

I use an Eisenhower Matrix to prioritize issues. Draw a grid with effort on the vertical axis and impact on the horizontal axis. High-effort, low-impact tasks shouldn’t be prioritized. Focus on the “Goldilocks zone”—low effort, high impact.

This approach helps eliminate urgency bias and refocus efforts on what truly matters for competitiveness and flexibility.

How to Start Researching Your Software

The simplest form of research is casual user conversations. Schedule time to sit with your users, understand their workflows and uncover existing problems.

• Ask about their pain points.
• Listen without offering solutions.
• Document findings (Google Docs, Word, Notion, etc.).
• Collaborate with your development team to implement updates.
• Test to confirm the problem is resolved.

If you’re ready for more formal research, consider hiring professionals (eh-hem, like us). At Volano Software, we offer various research services tailored to your needs. Reach out to us at hello@volanosoftware.com.

---

Three Research Approaches We Use

Casual User Discussion

• “Day in the Life” Research: Understand overall workflows and pain points.
• Task Completion Studies: Focus on specific challenges.
• Challenge & Solution Sessions: Identify problems and explore user-driven solutions.

Formal Research

• In-person or video interviews for detailed insights.
• Screen recordings with empathy mapping to document user thoughts and actions.
• Ethnographic research to understand broader user challenges beyond the software.

Multi-Channel Feedback

• Surveys
• User interviews
• User testing and workflow mapping

---

Recap

• Don’t skip research. It delivers ROI and ensures project success.
• Involve the right people. The quality of feedback depends on who you ask.
• Solve the right problems. Use tools like the Eisenhower Matrix to prioritize effectively.

At Volano Software, we integrate research into every stage of development to build products that truly meet user needs. Whether you’re in B2B or B2C, the outcomes are the same: happy users who work more efficiently with less frustration.

Interested in more content like this? Join our newsletter.