Ask people to reconstruct a recent situation before showing them a solution. Follow what they did, who became involved and what happened next. Keep the interview separate from a sales conversation so that agreement with your idea does not replace evidence about their work.
Start with a learning question you can actually investigate
Choose a decision the interview could inform. “Find out whether people like our reporting tool” invites approval; “understand what delays the monthly report” directs attention to a process. List the assumptions beneath your proposed solution, then choose a few that a participant can discuss from experience. An interview cannot establish everything about a market or predict future purchases.
Recruit around the relevant situation rather than enthusiasm for the product. Someone who recently prepared a report may remember handovers that a senior sponsor has never seen. Explain the purpose, duration and how notes will be used. Offer an accessible way to participate, and obtain agreement before recording. A useful conversation does not require collecting confidential documents or unnecessary personal details.
Follow an incident from beginning to end
Open with a concrete prompt: “Tell me about the last time you had to prepare this report.” Ask what triggered the work, which information arrived first and where the participant had to wait. Follow vague statements with requests for an example. A pause, exception or improvised workaround may reveal more than a polished description of the official procedure.
Keep proposed features out of your follow-up questions. “Would automatic reminders help?” supplies an answer. “What happened after the missing information was noticed?” allows the participant to describe reminders, escalation or a deliberate choice to proceed without it. Ask about consequences without suggesting how serious they ought to be. A problem you consider expensive may be an acceptable inconvenience to the person handling it.
Separate the conversation from your interpretation
Take short notes that distinguish reported events, direct observations and your inferences. If someone says they checked three systems, record that statement; do not silently translate it into a demand for an integrated platform. Capture the circumstances that made the incident unusual as well as details suggesting it happens regularly.
When a participant contradicts an earlier answer, explore the difference gently. The standard workflow may differ from what happened under a deadline. Allow time for clarification rather than forcing the account into your planned sequence. If a commercial conversation is appropriate, explicitly close the research portion first. Answers given after a pitch should be labelled so they do not become indistinguishable from the earlier account.
Finish with a finding and an unanswered question
Review notes promptly while the sequence is still clear. Write a brief account of the situation, actions, consequence and uncertainty. Check whether the finding depends on one person, one organisation or one exceptional deadline. Share only the material your team needs, keeping access and retention appropriate to the participant's agreement.
Decide what the next conversation should challenge. You might seek someone whose report arrived on time, a colleague receiving the handover or a buyer responsible for approving changes. Interviews accumulate value when they refine questions. Repeating the same script until enough people agree can produce confidence without improving the decision.
Fictional example: the missing receipt is only the beginning
A fictional scenario to explain the method, not a customer result or a market benchmark.
In a fictional expense-reporting project, Lena begins with a dashboard concept. Her first participant says the current process is “a mess”. Lena asks about the most recent submission rather than opening her prototype. The participant describes finding a missing receipt, sending four reminders and then discovering that the supervisor was travelling when approval was due.
The interview note records a late approval handover and an unclear substitute approver. It also records that collecting totals was straightforward. Lena now has a reason to investigate approval cover, while the proposed dashboard remains untested. In a second conversation she asks an administrator about a month when everything finished on time. That comparison could reveal a working practice worth preserving. These invented events illustrate how a neutral interview changes a research question; they provide no evidence about demand for an expense product.
TAKE THIS INTO YOUR NEXT CONVERSATION
A practical next-step checklist.
- State one decision the interview should inform.
- Recruit people who recently experienced the relevant situation.
- Ask for actions and consequences before introducing features.
- Label observations, reported events and interpretations separately.
- Choose a follow-up that could challenge the emerging explanation.
Common questions.
Should I show a prototype during a discovery interview?
You can, after investigating the current situation. Mark the transition clearly and treat reactions to the prototype as a separate kind of evidence.
How many interviews are enough?
Use the decision and remaining uncertainty to judge the next step. Repeated themes in a convenient group do not prove you have covered other roles or buying situations.
Further reading & source context.
These primary references provide background. They are not evidence for the fictional example above and do not endorse AccelerateLink.
Found an error or a missing qualification? Send an editorial correction.
Find my next move.
Use a practical tool to turn this idea into a clearer starting point.
Find my next move