Contextual inquiry is a type of field study that pairs in-depth observation and semistructured interviews of a small sample of users in order to gain a robust understanding of work practices and behaviors. Like any field study, it’s conducted in situ — meaning that the researcher observes users in their natural environments, where they typically do their work or other activities of interest in real life.
Performing in-situ research is valuable: It helps us see the natural distractions, workarounds, and interruptions that would not be easy to uncover in lab-based settings. Field studies are especially useful when the researcher is not familiar the work being observed or lacks the domain knowledge to understand or envision what obstacles that work might face.
However, field studies do have some drawbacks:
- Access: It can be difficult to get access to certain “natural environments. If you’re interested in people’s shopping habits, it’s easy enough to conduct research in a public place like a store. But other environments, such as people’s homes or places of work, have more restricted access.
- Resources: Traveling to the user can be time and cost prohibitive.
- Safety: Researchers should avoid being alone with a participant or without a means to communication with external parties during the session. This can be a challenge in areas of restricted access.
Remote tools and methods often alleviate many of the challenges associated with in-person research, with some tradeoffs. Many UX professionals are familiar with such remote methods, having experienced a need to adapt to remote UX work during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Can You Do Remote Contextual Inquiry?
Remote contextual inquiry almost sounds like an oxymoron. If, by definition, contextual inquiry takes place within the natural environment of the user, can you conduct a contextual inquiry session remotely, without actually be physically with the user?
The short answer: Yes, and with great success!
While I was conducting research for our course Designing Complex Applications for Specialized Domains, I had to abandon in-person contextual-inquiry sessions and transition to conducting research remotely due to pandemic-related travel restrictions and safety concerns. With some creativity, I was able to adapt my process and approach and use remote methods that yielded useful insights.
It’s true that remote contextual inquiry is not a true field study because only the user is in-situ, not the researcher. (In fact, I often refer to remote contextual inquiry as a “semicontextual inquiry” due to this technical accuracy.) However, as long as the user is working within the true and typical context of their activity, remote contextual inquiry is still a worthwhile method for uncovering valuable insights. The same distractions, workarounds, and interruptions still happen whether the researcher is observing physically or remotely. It just takes a little more practice and vigilance to notice these in a remote setting, because our purview of the environment is limited.
The SetUp: What Does Remote Contextual Inquiry Look Like?
It’s worth noting that some types of work are better candidates for remote contextual inquiry, such as those who are:
- Computer-based, so that the work is easily viewable by the researcher through screensharing
- Desk-based, so users are not moving around the physical space and out of researcher’s sight frequently or for long periods of time
- On a single, screen-sharable display, so that the work and applications are not spread over several monitors that are not viewable to the researcher
These constraints limit us to to computer-based knowledge workers who have limited physical interaction with others during their work (excluding video or phone calls or communications through email or messaging applications).
In order to conduct remote contextual inquiry effectively, there are technical requirements from both the user’s and researcher’s end:
- Webcam and microphone for communicating during the session
- Access to a video-call platform with screen-sharing capabilities (e.g., Zoom), and no strict firewalls on the user’s end that will block screensharing
- Adequate internet speed to sustain video calling and any other web-based applications simultaneously
- A monitor for the researcher that is large enough to observe the work and take notes in a digital application, if preferred
Of course, the researcher needs a quiet, distraction-free space to observe, but the user should use the space where they typically do their work (distractions and all!).
The process for remote contextual inquiry follows a similar structure as that for in-person contextual inquiry:
- The user is at their computer, ready to work in the setting where they typically work.
- The researcher initiates a video call and provides an introduction and primer to help the user orient to the session.
- The researcher conducts a short, initial interview aimed at understanding the context of the user’s work and current work-based goals.
- The user shares her screen and proceeds to do work while the researcher observes for a predetermined amount of time.
- The session concludes with a short wrap-up interview that allows the researcher to clarify observations and probe on any points of interest.
Making Remote Contextual Inquiry Work
Here are 10 lessons learned from conducting remote contextual inquiry:
1. Clearly communicate special study terms and participation requirements.
For any research, study requirements should be communicated and informed consent obtained ahead of time. It’s critical and ethical to ensure that participants fully understand the study and that they are comfortable and able to comply with its terms. The format of remote contextual inquiry just requires additional considerations that must be carefully communicated and understood for the session to be successful.
For example, some organizations block screensharing capabilities for security reasons, so make sure participants are aware of this requirement ahead of time. If you intend to record the session (ideal), plan additional time for participants who may have to seek approval from compliance or legal departments to grant you permission to do so.
When you don’t follow this tip: Your session may become useless — for example, because your participant cannot screenshare or their work computer blocks video calls. I once had a participant who attempted to hold his mobile phone’s camera up to his monitor while he worked on his computer. (Needless to say, a waste of time for both of us.)
2. Stress your interest in the user’s natural environment.
Stress your desire to witness the user’s typical environment. Otherwise, well-meaning participants may try to move their work to a quiet, less-distracting place in an attempt to be helpful.
Communicate this desire before and at the beginning of the session. It can take a couple of times to convince people that you are really okay with and interested in the typical distractions they deal with: the needy colleague’s messages, the kids running through the background, or the construction noise coming through the window. The same goes for digital interruptions: Remind participants to check email, answer messages, or use other applications during the work as they would typically, so that they don’t turn off distractions that would otherwise be part of the workflow.
You could also ask participants to share photos of their typical workstation and the surrounding space with you ahead of time. Not only does this reinforce your desire to witness the work in the real daily environment, but it also enables you to better understand context clues during the session. Are they using more than one monitor or machine? Are they in a shared space, such as a kitchen, where others might pass through, or a private office? Are there reference materials on the desk or wall?
When you don’t follow this tip: You won’t get a feel for how the user’s work is impacted by the natural environment and won’t be able to observe a host of areas where the user could be better supported.
3. Plan additional time for practicing and testing technical requisites.
In addition to communicating explicit technical constraints and instructions ahead of time, plan time to test them. Some participants may not be aware of firewalls or other security restrictions until they are blocked in the moment.
Rather than eat into session time, you may be able to find ways to creatively test these technical requirements ahead of time. For example, consider welcoming participants to the study with a 10-minute video call. You can build a bit of initial rapport while simultaneously ensuring that the participant has an appropriate webcam and microphone and seeing if they can use the video-call platform you’ll be using for the session.
This is also a good time to practice any special technical steps that users will need to follow during the session. For example, make sure users can share their entire desktop, not just the primary application window. (It’s useful to see what other websites, applications, or documentation people reference in conjunction with their activity of interest.)
When you don’t follow this tip: Valuable session time is wasted on technical instructions or, worse, you will get an incomplete picture of the user’s work because the user does not have or cannot use the appropriate setup.
4. Adapt the structure for virtual attention spans and constraints.
Typical in-person contextual-inquiry sessions might last an entire day, so that the researcher can get a full understanding of longer workflows. That schedule is not appropriate for a remote session of any kind, due to people’s limited attention spans.
A good rule of thumb is to limit each contextual-inquiry session to 2–3 hours, including session introduction and pre- and post-observation interviews and discussion. You can (and probably should) do multiple sessions with each participant to observe different aspects of the work and catch different interferences or issues.
You can also consider breaking the initial session into 2 parts with distinct goals: Separate the introduction and initial interview from the actual observation. There are 2 advantages to this structure:
- It allows you to notice and fix any technical issues before the critical observation session.
- It helps you avoid the “product tour.” Expert users and knowledge-based workers can be passionate about the tools that help them do their work. Some users have a difficult time transitioning into real work and will spend much of their session explaining the greatness of the application and diving into its impressive capabilities. Users who are given a separate space to talk about their domain and their tools have an easier time falling into a true flow of work when it’s time to observe.
When you don’t follow this tip: Participants may become fatigued from sessions that last too long or might struggle to transition from discussion to work.
5. Turn off your camera during the work.
During the observation portion of the session, turn off your camera. This advice might seem counterintuitive, because you want to maintain rapport throughout the session and don’t want to signal any disengagement; however, turning off the camera can help the user to slip into a better state of flow. Your constant video feed may be distracting, as users attempt to watch for feedback or read your facial expressions. (Bonus: Turning off the camera may alleviate bandwidth issues.)
Turn the camera back on to ask clarifying questions during the observation and during any post-observation discussion.
When you don’t follow this tip: Participants may be distracted by your obvious omnipresence, and default to continuously addressing or watching you rather than focusing on their work.
6. Record and revisit the sessions (with the user if possible).
If possible, record the sessions (and gain informed consent for recording ahead of time). Not only will you be able to rewatch the session during analysis, but you will get the opportunity to continue discovery with the user as a partner. If project scope allows, extract smaller clips to share back with the participant. In a followup session (or asynchronously), have the participant watch the short clip and clarify their thoughts and actions during the work.
If you are unable to record the remote session, don’t write off the study. In many in-person contextual-inquiry sessions, cameras are not allowed when there is sensitive or private information revealed during the session through the software interface. In either case, observing the work without a recording will still reveal valuable insights unable to be gained through other research methods.
When you don’t follow this tip: You miss a valuable opportunity to deepen your understanding of the work, as well as revisit any workflows that were unclear or need additional discussion.
7. Watch diligently for environmental cues.
During observation, watch the person as well as the work. It is more difficult to read context and environmental cues in a remote setting, but by watching the person’s facial expressions and movements, you can extract valuable information.
For example, take note of off-screen phenomena and behaviors: Is the participant looking at another screen? Are there distracting noises or activity in the background? Does something pull their attention away from their work? When you notice these occurrences, ask questions about what’s going on.
When you don’t follow this tip: The true context of the physical environment — a valuable part of contextual inquiry — is not considered.
8. Use active inquiry.
There are 2 approaches to traditional contextual inquiry:
- Active inquiry: The researcher interrupts the work to ask questions during the session.
- Passive inquiry: The research only asks questions and facilitates discussion after the session.
In most cases, remote contextual inquiry is better suited for active inquiry. It’s more difficult to remember and recall points of interest in a remote setting, so when additional clarification around a point of interest is needed, interject with followup questions. (Of course, remember that any interjection disrupts the natural flow of work, so balance this tradeoff.)
This clip from a remote contextual inquiry session shows the researcher using active inquiry: When the user switches applications, the researcher prompts her to explain the reason.
Some level of thinking aloud is also useful in remote sessions. Thinking aloud is a technique used in traditional usability testing where we ask the participants to verbalize their thoughts and actions as they complete tasks. Expert workers will not be able to consistently verbalize every choice or thought (nor should we ask them to), but it is useful to hear any reactions or thought processes that they can express. In remote contextual inquiry, thinking aloud should be encouraged but not unnaturally forced.
When you don’t follow this tip: You may not be able to track key actions, behaviors, or attitudes. Users may also not recall their behaviors or thoughts during important points of interest if you wait to probe during post-observation discussion.
9. Improvise.
Despite your best efforts and planning, working while a remote-meeting attendee observes may not ever feel natural for some participants. If users are unable to get into the flow of their work and provide little insight, before ending the session, improvise. If you are familiar with the product, provide some tasks as you might during traditional usability testing. Ask participants to show you how they would do something or solve a problem that didn’t come up naturally during the session. While prompting users or providing hypothetical constraints doesn’t provide the same type of insights as observing real work, it can still provide value.
This technique can also be a useful if there is additional time at the end of a segment and you want to probe into areas of the application that users did not interact with. In the clip from a remote contextual-inquiry session below, the researcher prompts the user to investigate some customization functions. This part of the session helped the researcher see the user’s reaction and understanding of features that were not used during her natural workflow.
When you don’t follow this tip: You miss out on valuable time with a user!
10. Invite users to followup sessions.
As discussed, remote contextual inquiry sessions should be contained to a reasonable (2–3 hour) timeline. But, adhering to that constraint limits your ability to observe entire workflows and it might mean abruptly ending the session in the middle of a workflow.
When this happens, if the work is particularly interesting, ask the user if she is interested in and able to join you again for a followup session. Or, if some particular aspect of the work is of interest, ask the user when they will continue that work and whether you’d be able to join again to continue observing (for additional incentive, of course).
When you don’t follow that tip: You don’t get a comprehensive understanding of the full workflow or user journey.
Conclusion
Remote contextual inquiry is possible for certain types of work and reveals insights that other forms of remote research, such as remote usability testing and user interviews, cannot. Plan ahead and adapt these guidelines to adjust contextual inquiry (and other types of field studies) to a virtual setting.
