in brief
- Interviews are useful for accounts, explanations, constraints, and the context around a decision.
- More interviews cannot by themselves establish transaction rates, campaign lift, or how a physical task is performed.
- Name the missing evidence first, then choose interviews, observation, records, or an experiment according to the question.
More customer interviews will fail to answer a question when the question requires evidence the interview cannot produce. Conversation can explain an account of a choice. It cannot turn that account into a transaction ledger or establish an advertising effect without a suitable comparison.
This is a method choice, not a criticism of interviewing. A good explanation can save a team from testing the wrong thing. A good measurement can prevent a convincing story from being mistaken for the dominant pattern.
which questions need another kind of evidence?
| question | useful evidence | what an interview can add |
|---|---|---|
| How many customers repurchased? | Appropriate transaction records over a defined period. | Reported reasons and circumstances. |
| Why did buyers stop using it? | Relevant buyer accounts, with corroboration where possible. | The experience and alternatives. |
| Can people open this package? | Observation of the physical task. | What they expected and found difficult. |
| Did the campaign increase sales? | A suitable experimental or causal measurement design. | How people understood the message. |
| Does a problem exist in this market? | Scoped existing evidence and targeted research. | Detail about an unresolved buying situation. |
what can ikea’s research illustrate?
IKEA’s Life at Home research account describes using home visits. The method makes the setting part of the investigation, rather than relying solely on answers given away from it.
Our interpretation is that context can be observable. A person may describe a kitchen as too small while the research team needs to understand what happens during a particular storage task, including the available space and the routine around it. More questions about the opinion are not interchangeable with observing the task.
Before commissioning another interview, write down which missing fact it is supposed to supply.
research note from relvo
how do you name an evidence gap?
Write the decision, the known evidence, and the unresolved question together. “We need to understand customers better” does not specify a study. “We do not know whether recent trial buyers understood the preparation instructions” gives a group, an event, and an uncertainty.
Check the evidence already available. Support exports might contain accounts of the same problem. Prior research might have tested an earlier version. Public discussion might provide category context. Keep company and market evidence separate, even when they point in the same direction.
hypothetical research brief
Decision: whether to revise snack-pack instructions. Known: support reports mention preparation difficulty. Missing: whether the current instructions fail during first use. Method: observe relevant first-time users completing the task, then ask neutral follow-up questions. The brief is an example, not a relvo customer engagement.
when should interviews continue?
Continue when the remaining uncertainty is about a relevant account or explanation that another participant could help examine. Seek variation and contrary cases, not repeated agreement with the team’s preferred story. Fix leading questions or recruitment problems before simply increasing the number of interviews.
The cost of research also matters. An irreversible product change deserves more checking than a small, reversible copy test. A limited evidence base may support a narrow action while leaving a broader conclusion open.
how does relvo use interviews?
relvo starts with public market evidence and commissions primary research for named gaps. The team arranges sourcing. In-app interview capture and participant recruitment are not available today. A transcript contributes a buying-decision record only where quoted evidence supports the fields and a person accepts the draft.
Read how to act with incomplete evidence for deciding what to do while a gap remains.
Choose the next research instrument for the missing evidence, rather than for its speed or novelty. Bring that question to relvo.