Overcoming the limitations of research in inspiring actions
The words of wisdom, “research deliverable is an input and not an output” were spoken by a client who I respect for her clarity of thinking and commitment to bottom line thinking.
These words resonate with me because I have learned that the true role of research is to change minds by challenging beliefs and expanding consciousness. That requires open minded immersion in the real world and dialogue with real people.
The most impact I have ever had with research was when the clients were immersed in the process of discovery and synthesis and beliefs at different levels of the client organisation were challenged through passionate conversations. The intended impact of the research began even before final reports were written and voluminous PowerPoint presentations were delivered.
Gandhi, Buddha, Mandela and King Junior had a lasting impact on the world through active engagement with people. They provoked people to question the status quo. They provoked people to step out of their comfort zone. They inspired social imagination and mobilised collective energy for change.
The primary purpose of research is to expand consciousness and inspire imagination and action. Often researchers trapped in silos find themselves using research deliverables to perpetuate their own existence by subtly justifying the need for more research. This leads to creating beautiful research outputs that end up in archival collection. Our company has been commissioned several times in the past to process hordes of reports generated by multiple internal teams and vendors and to help the client organisations understand “what we know and where the knowledge gaps are”. I have learned that the insights tucked away on servers is neither knowledge nor wisdom. True research must be seen as an active process of questioning status quo and embracing change in order to build mental capacity to continuously simplify (complexity), improve (experiences) and be prepared to leapfrog (to a radically evolving future).
The real problem is every professional believes their knowledge domain and practice has a unique capacity methods tools and the mandate to change the world. Designers, engineers, researchers, software developers each have their own domain specific arrogance expressed through domain specific jargon for innovation and change. The truth is – change happens through engagement across domains of knowledge practices and through involvement of all stakeholders. That is the essence of change through co-creation.
A few years ago, one of the senior directors at an auto company hired us to conduct a global study to help one of their legacy brands leapfrog to the future. While the request for proposal asked for research, the client made it clear during our initial conversations that he was hoping to use this project to evolve a new practice where research and design did not live in separate silos. He wanted to focus more on challenging closely held beliefs, expanding awareness about the changes in the mindsets of younger generations of customers and through continuous immersion and dialogue to inspire action for much needed radical transformation of the brand and the product. We were successful in facilitating these journeys of discovery and actions by taking large teams from the client company in the fieldwork and by conducting frequent synthesis sessions (both in-field and back home) to generate momentum for change and a sense of clarity and purpose for the type of change that was needed.
In summary I echo the wisdom of my client who said, “research is an input, not an output” by proposing a shift to a cross- disciplinary dialogue aided by new mindsets methods and tools of collaboration, co-imagination and co-creation focused on inspiring action.
