User Researcher Job Description Template

End-to-end research execution · 22%
This role must operate independently on well-defined research problems, ensuring studies are executed with rigor from planning through synthesis. Evaluated in Round 1.

• Weak: Describes past research work but cannot explain how research questions drove method selection and study structure end-to-end.
• Meets the bar: Explains a complete research workflow for a project and connects the approach to the stated goals.
• Strong: Leads multiple end-to-end studies, adapts methods mid-study based on findings, and clearly documents decisions and tradeoffs.

Qualitative synthesis · 18%
The ability to synthesize observations into themes, user needs, and recommendations is central to research impact. Evaluated in Round 2.

• Weak: Lists findings as observations without articulating themes, underlying user needs, or implications.
• Meets the bar: Synthesizes into themes and translates evidence into clear implications for product/design decisions.
• Strong: Uses structured synthesis (e.g., journey/workflows/affinity mapping), validates interpretations with evidence, and differentiates signal vs. noise.

Research planning and artifacts · 16%
High-quality plans and discussion/usability materials are essential for consistent study outcomes. Evaluated in Round 1.

• Weak: Provides examples of guides or plans that are generic and not tied to specific questions or measurable outcomes.
• Meets the bar: Creates guides and usability plans that map clearly to research questions and participant tasks.
• Strong: Builds structured artifacts with measurable success criteria, thoughtful task design, and practical prompts for consistent sessions.

Stakeholder communication · 16%
Research must be communicated effectively to influence decisions across Product, Design, and Engineering. Evaluated in Round 3.

• Weak: Presents findings as a narrative without clear takeaways, tradeoffs, or decision support.
• Meets the bar: Delivers clear readouts with key findings, evidence, and actionable recommendations.
• Strong: Tailors communication for different stakeholders and drives agreement on next steps through structured decision framing.

Usability testing skill · 12%
Usability testing knowledge is needed to evaluate flows and turn testing results into iterations. Evaluated in Round 2.

• Weak: Describes usability testing at a high level but cannot explain task setup, success criteria, or how issues were prioritized.
• Meets the bar: Runs usability tests with defined tasks and captures evidence tied to research questions and observed behaviors.
• Strong: Designs tests that isolate root causes, prioritizes issues using impact and frequency, and recommends specific fixes tied to evidence.

Recruiting and research sessions · 10%
Recruiting quality and session execution affect data validity; this role must be reliable and consistent. Evaluated in Round 3.

• Weak: Cannot describe how participants were screened or how session logistics were managed to reduce bias and improve data quality.
• Meets the bar: Explains recruitment/screening approach and how sessions were moderated/managed for consistency.
• Strong: Designs robust screening criteria, mitigates common session risks (leading questions, inconsistent tasks), and documents deviations.

Independence on scoped work · 6%
Mid-level independence is required to execute on well-defined problems without heavy supervision. Evaluated in Round 3.

• Weak: Relies heavily on others for study planning choices and cannot explain how they worked through ambiguity.
• Meets the bar: Identifies assumptions, proposes a plan, and seeks targeted input when needed.
• Strong: Proactively clarifies scope, balances constraints, and delivers results with minimal back-and-forth.