From user needs to collective needs with deliberative research

The limits of user research

User research is core to how we design user-centred policies, services and products. Qualitative methods such as interviews, contextual inquiry and diary studies give us insight into the needs and experiences of individual users, and help us gain a deeper understanding of the problems we’re trying to solve for them. In a typical user research process, we analyse and synthesise the raw data collected to identify themes, find patterns and develop insights to help us make decisions about what to do next. But not all problems can be solved in this way.

Complex challenges like climate change, public health and online safety require us to think and act collectively. In these contexts, solving for individual needs today often has an impact on the collective in the future. This is well illustrated by the air conditioning paradox: on a hot day, an individual user needs to stay cool. Buying an air conditioning unit may therefore be the logical, user-centred solution to their immediate problem. But while the air conditioning unit cools the air indoors, it pumps hot air back onto the street, raising the outdoor temperature to create a ‘heat island’. The increased heat makes everyone’s air conditioning unit work harder, consuming more energy, emitting more greenhouse gases and further accelerating the climate change that caused the uncomfortably hot day to begin with. To avoid this, we need better ways to surface the trade-offs and long-term systemic impacts of our design decisions.

User research typically involves small sample sizes. This might be enough to validate an assumption or identify a pain point that needs to be addressed. In complex challenges like these, however, it doesn’t give us the diversity of views we need to really understand the problem from multiple angles. Similarly, the relatively short amount of time we spend conducting research with an individual user can privilege reactive opinions, pre-existing views and surface-level feedback. When the topic is unfamiliar, users need time to learn about the issue and consider their position before giving a response.

It’s important to recognise that people’s views are malleable and shaped through their interactions with others. We need methods that don’t just ask people what they think in isolation, but allow them to weigh their needs against the needs of the community. That is where deliberative research comes in.

What is deliberative research?

Deliberative research sits within a broader family of deliberative methods, including Citizens’ Assemblies and participatory budgeting. It’s best understood as a structured, facilitated conversation where people are supported to learn together, explore trade-offs, and make informed decisions about complex issues.

Deliberative research is a process of guided learning and dialogue. Participants are introduced to new information, encouraged to listen to each other, and given the time and space to adjust their views as they learn more. This makes it particularly suited to complex issues, where there are no easy answers and individual needs in the present can be in tension with the long-term needs of the collective. It helps us to understand not just what people think, but how and why their views change - or don’t.

Integrating deliberation into the design process

Typically, deliberative research is used within a social research context to inform policymakers of the public’s views on a topic. However, in our work, we’ve started experimenting with using deliberative research to support the early stages of policy and service design. At that stage, it’s a useful method to bring to life a number of options for how a policy or service might be implemented, and gain insight into its desirability and ‘acceptability’ among a diverse user group. 

To do that, we’ve borrowed some of the core elements of deliberative research you’d find in a social research context. In our recent projects, that has included:

• Employing a sortition recruitment approach to reach a representative ‘mini-public’ of the type you might find in a Citizens’ Assembly, or employing an ‘enclave deliberation’ approach to prioritise recruitment of a group of individuals with a shared and often marginalised identity

• Using deliberative approaches and choice architecture tools such as voting to encourage participants to weigh options and make decisions together 

• Focusing analysis and synthesis on surfacing conflicts, and identifying how and why the group’s opinions as a whole shift from the beginning to the end

However, we’ve also adapted the method to work better in a design context by:

• Bringing a service or policy to life through visual artefacts such as storyboards that help translate complex ideas into accessible and engaging materials that support participants’ learning

• Undertaking rapid iteration of design options with participants based on their discussions, helping us to sense check our understanding and move towards a solution together at pace. 

Designing for collective needs, not just user needs

In user-centred design, we’re used to thinking in terms of individual user needs. But some problems require us to think collectively and find tools that help us design with diverse groups, not just for individuals.

Deliberative research does exactly that. It surfaces conflicts, explores trade-offs, and creates space for consensus - or at least mutual understanding. In an increasingly polarised world, that ability to hold difficult conversations, navigate disagreement constructively and build collective understanding is essential. 

This blog is based on the talk Designing for a just transition: integrating deliberative methods in policy and service design for net zero’ at SDinGov Virtual 2025.