Creating shared understanding through research observation
Between December 2025 and July 2026, we conducted 8 rounds of user research on the Communicating Funding project. With less than a sprint between some rounds, we needed a way to share findings quickly, build confidence in the evidence and involve a wider range of colleagues without relying solely on research reports. Live user research sessions are typically limited to one observer and one note taker, making wider involvement difficult.
To address this, we introduced virtual observer rooms in Microsoft Teams – by streaming the live research session to a separate call, we could allow colleagues to observe sessions remotely without participating directly. Our objectives were to:
- build a shared understanding of user needs
- increase empathy across multidisciplinary teams
- increase confidence in findings through direct observation
- support faster decision making between research rounds
- enable rapid iteration in a fast-moving delivery environment
This allowed wider access to research while maintaining a controlled environment.
Designing an observer room approach
Observer rooms were initially limited to the project team and later expanded to selected stakeholders and colleagues from related projects. To protect participants and research quality, we established clear principles:
- observers could not interact with participants
- observation was based on informed user consent
- observers followed agreed etiquette
- researchers controlled attendance and access
- all observers, note takers and streamers received training
This allowed wider access to research while maintaining a controlled environment.
Balancing the opportunities and risks
Observer rooms increase access to research but also introduce risks.
Observers could draw conclusions from individual sessions before analysis was complete. Participants might also be less comfortable sharing honest feedback if observation was not clearly explained. In addition, observer rooms created operational and governance challenges around access, setup and consistency.
To mitigate these risks, we introduced several measures to help maintain research integrity, participant trust and consistent delivery.
Managing interpretation and observer bias
To reduce the risk of observers jumping to conclusions, we ran daily debrief sessions throughout each round of research.
All note takers attended these sessions, and observers were invited to join on an optional basis. The debrief purpose was to compare observations, align understanding and identify where different attendees may have interpreted participant behaviour differently.
We were careful to explain that observations were not the same as research insights - each debrief was prefaced with a reminder that observations represented individual pieces of evidence which could not be used to inform recommendations, design decisions or outputs until analysis had been completed across the full body of research.
This helped create a shared understanding of what had been observed whilst reducing the likelihood of stakeholders drawing conclusions from individual sessions in isolation.
Protecting participant comfort and trust
We wanted participants to be able to speak openly about their experiences without feeling monitored or judged.
To support this, observer rooms were completely separate from the participant's research session and enabled more than one or two observers to watch without being visible to the participant.
We also created explicit observer room etiquette which all attendees were expected to follow. Observers were instructed not to interfere with sessions, distract note takers or attempt to influence the direction of the research.
Participants were informed about observer rooms at multiple stages of the research process. The consent process explained what observer rooms were, how they worked and who would be observing. This information was repeated at the start of each session, allowing participants to make an informed decision about whether they were comfortable continuing.
By making observation transparent and obtaining informed consent, we were able to balance stakeholder access with participant wellbeing.
Controlling access and influence
Not everybody was permitted to observe research sessions.
We retained full administrative control over observer rooms, and all observer access requests were reviewed before attendance was granted.
Attendance decisions were based on an individual's role, their relationship to the research and the potential influence they might have over participants or their organisations.
As part of this approach, we did not permit policy colleagues or individuals who could influence funding decisions affecting participants' organisations to attend observer rooms. This helped avoid any perception that research participation could impact funding or organisational outcomes.
Maintaining control over access ensured that observer rooms remained focused on learning from users rather than monitoring them.
Managing technical and operational risks
Virtual observer rooms within Microsoft Teams offered significant benefits, but they can also be difficult for new team members to configure correctly.
To reduce dependency on researcher support, we developed a detailed observer room setup guide. The guide documented the end-to-end setup process, common issues and troubleshooting steps.
This allowed colleagues to become confident in running observer rooms without requiring one-to-one support and helped create a more resilient and scalable approach across the project team.
The guide also improved consistency, ensuring that observer rooms were configured correctly and in line with participant consent requirements.
Understanding the value of observation
Observer rooms enabled colleagues to hear directly from users about their needs, frustrations and experiences. We found this helped teams understand evidence more quickly than through reports alone and created greater alignment around user needs.
Benefits included:
- increased empathy with users
- improved buy-in for design recommendations
- faster prioritisation and decision making
- greater shared understanding across disciplines
These benefits were particularly valuable when research rounds took place in quick succession. Because stakeholders had observed users directly, discussions could focus on responding to evidence rather than building confidence in it. Attendance also increased over time as colleagues recognised the value of observation.
Outcomes
Observer rooms helped maintain stakeholder engagement across multiple rounds of research and enabled faster decision making by giving colleagues direct exposure to users. This reduced reliance on research reports as the primary way of sharing findings and helped teams build a shared understanding of user needs.
However, while virtual observer rooms became an important part of this project, they should not be considered standard research practice. Observation can bring significant value, but it introduces additional risks to participants, research quality and the interpretation of findings.
Next steps
Observer rooms should be considered on a project-by-project basis rather than used by default. Researchers should assess both the benefits and risks before deciding whether observation is appropriate. This includes understanding:
- the users involved
- stakeholders' understanding of user research
- stakeholders' relationship to DfE or the product being researched
These factors can significantly affect the level of participant, stakeholder and research risk.
Where observer rooms are used, participant consent, clear governance, structured training and controlled access remain essential for maintaining participant trust and research integrity.